Ain't It Cool News (


Enterprise 1.9 FAQ

What’s it called?


What does Herc secretly call this episode when no one is looking?

“Ugh! Let's See What That Bowling-Alley Lawyer Is Up To!"

Who’s responsible?

Teleplay is credited to Phyllis Strong & Mike Sussman (authors of “Strange New World” – the one with the lame transporter mishap).

What does TV Guide say?

“Disguised as locals, Archer and his expedition explore a civilization bedeviled by a virulent ailment possibly linked to a covert - and anomalous - nuclear reactor. Determined to find the truth, the captain teams up with a local apothecary (Diane DiLascio), leading to a close encounter between the two.”

Does Archer get pregnant?


What is TV Guide not telling us?

There is no nuclear reactor. It’s a matter-antimatter reactor. TV Guide is such a liar!

Lots of continuity this week?

Virtually none. This one stands alone to the point of tearful annoyance.

Is T’Pol back to being a wet blanket?

Very much so. She wants to do all their investigating of this new civilization from orbit. “It’s standard protocol to wait until a society develops warp drive before initiating first contact.”

Does everyone disregard T’Pol’s advice?

To a degree. “Those are Vulcan protocols, not human,” points out Trip. Still, they explore disguised as locals.

Does T’Pol get all jealous when Archer smooches the local?

In no way. But when they go undercover, we do get to see Jolene Blalock trying out a new ear-camouflaging hairstyle.

What’s with that reactor?

A lizard-dude disguised as a local shopkeeper claims the reactor beneath his shop powers a device that allows him to fabricate food and clothing.

What does it really do?

It powers an impressive looking Viridium Isotope mining operation. But highly toxic industrial lubricant leaking from the reactor into the water supply is killing the locals.

Viridium Isotope?

It’s useful in the manufacture of explosives.

Any sign of Porthos?

He’s mentioned, but remains off-camera.

What’s good?

T’Pol advising Archer to “enjoy his tea.”

What’s not so good?

This turns out to be one pedestrian installment, with the fistfights and the shootouts and the break-ins. Where are the Archons when you need them? I'd even settle for a Ferengi.

How does it end, spoiler boy?

We witness a tender farewell between Archer and his medieval alien Erin Brockovich.

Herc’s rating for “Enterprise” 1.9?


The Hercules T. Strong Rating System:

  • ***** better than we deserve
  • **** better than most motion pictures
  • *** actually worth your valuable time
  • ** as horrible as most stuff on TV
  • * makes you quietly pray for bulletins

I warn you not to defy me!! Mmm cookies!!

I am – Hercules!!

To order coffee mugs and boxer shorts adorned with the image of a green, handicapable “Buffy” fanatic, click here.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Nov. 14, 2001, 3:42 a.m. CST

    Not surprised this one isn't reviewed well

    by flowergirl

    It doesn't look that great from the previews. Sort of a Kirk "boink 'em" style episode--Archer gets to kiss someone. Yawn. Don't get me wrong; I really like the show, but you can't expect every episode to score well. I'm surprised one like this was scheduled for sweeps month, though. TPTB probably thought they'd better include an episode to appeal to the 18 year old males (Archer gets some, presumably). Everyone is probably looking past it towards the next episode (Cold Front, I think) in which the temporal spy is introduced. I know I am. Not much of the delectable Trip in this one, huh? Darn. That Connor Trinneer melts my butter.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 3:51 a.m. CST


    by CaptainMisery

    I predict this lame-o series will end with Dean Stockwell bumbling onto the bridge. He'll smack Ziggy a few times and then Archer will LEAP into another show - this time as the Mom in Malcolm in the Middle. Wackiness ensues. THE CAPTAIN IS IN.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 5:16 a.m. CST


    by It's A Duck

    Goddammit, it can't start sucking already.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 11:38 a.m. CST

    Remember, ST TNG Sucked Big Time (at first)

    by McBUGDoc

    Remember, these things take some time. ST TNG really was poor initially. Fans hung in and it got much that we now have much lamer movies every few years.....Give it a chance. It will get better.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Silly Putty Aliens

    by tbrosz

    Is there any way the Star Trek producers can put actual aliens on their show? Even lizard guys are still people in lizard suits. Most aliens follow the Star Trek tradition of giving the makeup guy an egg of Silly Putty and telling him to make an alien. Look, the Silly Putty is on his forehead, he's an alien. Look, the Silly Putty is on his cheeks. He's a different alien. Look, the Silly Putty is on his nose. A third alien! Isn't this easy? And WOW! Who knew every female in the galaxy would have a hot, Earth-primate bod complete with hooters? This demonstrates the existence of God if nothing else does--and He's apparently wearing one of those beer hats. How about someone on the Enterprise having an affair with something that looks like a mistake from the sushi kitchen? I thought that was a hoot in "Galaxy Quest." "That's not right!" Seriously, if "Angel" can have a fairly decent Giant Bug, why not throw a few really "Alien" aliens in once in a while? "Farscape" has done a fairly decent job of this.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 12:32 p.m. CST

    Prose and Cons

    by jtownsel

    I agree that any TV series should be given a chance to develop. And I'm enjoying "Enterprise". But I have a few criticisms. First, does EVERY new Trek series need a full two years to develop? That seems to be the case. With TNG, that was accepted because it was the first new TV work in 20 years. But these same guys have been doing this since 1987! And characterization doesn't seem to be main problem, because in all series, the characters are given interesting distinct personalities in the first episode. I think the main problem, and with "Enterprise" in particular, is the lack of compelling stories. Where's the "high concept?" Where's "Mirror, Mirror?", "Best of Both Worlds", etc.? Also, abandon the episodic approach. Develop some intriguing character and story arcs.

  • Or not.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 1:25 p.m. CST

    Love on the Enterprise

    by Electric_Monk

    Its odd how many times Trek tries to pull out the love story card. It has never worked. Well, okay it worked with Kirk, if only because he could pull it off (no pun intended). Love stories on TNG, DS9 and Voy have all failed, mostly because you knew Picard, Sisko and that annoying Janeway would never give up the love of their ship. Kirk, while in the end the same, at any given time, might give up his ship. Over all, Enterprise is much better than Voyager, and I find it amusing that the two B's could have saved Voyager if they only injected a little humor and sex. Enterprise is not, say "Angie", but it is a lot funnier than Blameway's crew. And beyond Seven, sex did not exist on Voyager. Which was sad, because Garrett Wang is hot, and he should've had his shirt off more often than the one time. Getting back, love stories do not work on Trek, why try them? 'Cause if UPN wants the 18 male demo, then they have T'Pol. Why give the sexy Scott Backula a love interest...oh wait. Scott might take his shirt off!!! It's not the males, but the females and us queens. That is what UPN wants!

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 1:27 p.m. CST

    What's with the Farscape worship? That series is terrible

    by flowergirl

    I finally caught some reruns. I was expecting something special from the way everyone raves about it. It was awful. Cheesy, cheap sets, scantily clad everyone, bad story.....very bad story. Cleopatra 2525 quality. It was that awful. What I saw can't possibly be what people are raving about--it made Enterprise look like Shakespeare in comparison****folks, don't give up on Enterprise yet. If Farscape is the best the competition has to offer, Enterprise has a long healthy future ahead of it. Maybe I was watching the wrong show; but it said it was Farscape. My husband and I were making MST3K comments about it. It was definitely a hoot.

  • especially when you consider that the same people who did TNG, DS9, and Voyager are doing Enterprise. They should know how to do a good show and develop characters at the same time. That being said, it is natural for all Sci-Fi series to have good eps and weak eps. So far, Enterprise has had some good episodes (like last weeks Andorian ep.) and bad episodes (the mexican stand off one comes to mind first). I can tell that this series may also have a complicated story arc (ie. Babylon 5) that may start to develop. I'm willing to be patient as characters develop and story arcs are built, but I will not be as patient as I was with earlier ST series.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 2:29 p.m. CST

    Flowergirl, Farscape is...

    by SimonSezz

    ...not a show one can just jump in to. When I first saw it, I thought to myself, "What's up with the Muppets in Space meets Buck Rogers crap?" But then while flipping channels, it caught my attention. I decided to give it a second chance, and got caught up in one of the many story arcs. There is a lot of silliness to it, but there's also a lot of seriousness. But, hey, at least it's better than Lexx.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 2:42 p.m. CST

    "sucking aready"?

    by usagibrian

    ENTERPRISE has been a non-stop crapfest from episode 1. "TNG took time too..." At least it was watchable television. ENT is inept. Bad editing, weak structure, wretched acting (and not in a camp, entertaining way like the original). And the FARSCAPE bashers can go and frill yourselves; at least it's about something and executed with conviction and passion, something the TREK franchise has been lacking for a decade or so.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 2:57 p.m. CST

    This + Battlestar Galactica Revival = Death of Sci Fi

    by PencilSharp

    Not the channel, just the genre. Folks, I just posted to the Battlestar Galactica lovefest, and I think that these shows show that the major studios have NO FRIGGIN CLUE how to handle Sci Fi anymore... Even George "Send In The Clones" Lucas is tiring of the field. The only reason he's still hanging on is because he feels obligated to make TONS 'O' CASH. But I digress... ST stopped being fun when TNG went off the air, and that damn thing wasn't all that hot, either. TNG, VOY, DS9, and ENT are what happens when you take a good idea and let a bunch of wannabe Intellectuals have at it... Kick-Ass Sci Fi (KASF from now on) doesn't need awesome SFX, though that doesn't hurt; nor does it need exotic aliens, though that doesn't hurt either; KASF needs creative storytelling: new directions, fresh air, like that... ST:TOS rocked because if you take away the pointy ears, the tricorders, and Kirk's easy lays, you had a core of characters that you gave a crap about. These were folks that you would want to meet at a bar; hell, you might even buy them a drink. (a beer and cheet on your wife! Sorry, that's spreading faster than anthrax.) So let me issue the call one more time... The next ST should be about a Klingon ship. One that conservatives can call their own. WAR baby, that's KASF! Love, ~pS~

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 3:25 p.m. CST

    Question for Herc or whoever ele has seen it

    by humboldt99

    I seen it last night on A-channel in Canada. I thought the lizard guy was a Suliban bad guy. He looked just like one. But if they can shape-shift, why wear a mask? Unless it was molting or something.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 5:03 p.m. CST

    The next ST?

    by GPL Racer

    It's long past time to admit that this franchise has been done to death and we need to move on to something at least a little more original. Oh wait, we have, it's called Andromeda.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 5:05 p.m. CST

    Thanks Herc

    by humboldt99

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 5:05 p.m. CST

    Trip's the best character on the show...

    by Sgt. Bilko

    Which is why it should be him that continually gets the space wimmens. It could be a running gag. Good show though, even though I might skip this episode...

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 5:42 p.m. CST

    Jolene Blalock = DITZ!!!!!!!

    by Skippy

    Caught the "actress" who plays the Vulcan babe on Craig Kilborn on Friday and I must say that she came across as quite an airhead. She seemed to have no interest in building up the show or discussing the thrill that it should be to be on the show. For certain the Craig Kilborn producers wanted her on the show because she is eye candy personified. However, she should know it is her duty to plug the show as much as she can and NOT to try to forward her career as an individual actress! (and she is not even a good actress!) As for Enterprise itself, I agree with a previous Talk Back comment that suggested that they go back to Earth once in a while in order to keep the show grounded to the original concept - showing the origins of the Federation, and NOT just one ship! How about an episode showing the foundation of Starfleet Academy by Archer and some of his crewmates! Enterprise has to start looking at the big picture! Don't worry about running out of ideas .......... they'll evolve naturally! The writers just have to start thinking outside of the box! (and I don't mean bringing Worf aboard in the third season!)

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 5:59 p.m. CST

    Barzit Is Right

    by Barron34

    It is partially the fans fault that Star Trek sucks. This is because spineless fans will watch utter shit for years and years because the show "might get better". Newsflash: the producers have no incentive to improve shit show if everyone is watching and lapping up shit in the hopes that a miracle will happen and the show will magically improve and become good. Tehre has been no decent Star Trek since Deep Space Nine, and even that was only pretty good (which is enough). DS9 had continuity, sensible character development, and pretty good stories. Good shows should be rewarded with viewers. Bad shows should be boycotted. Voyager had a promising premise but the show was consistently shit becuase they had little incentive to improve it. They used gimmicks like casting cheesecake to put up their viewership. Now, I am in favor of good cheescake like the next guy, but cheesecake in the middle of a poorly written crap show is boring. I blame the producers, not the writers. ANd I feel sorry for the cast. They were good actors who got stuck in a bad show. And I feel sorry for legitimate Trek fans. We deserve good Trek. The current producers make shit because so many fans will watch any crap that they call Star Trek in the hopes thta a golden age of Trek will miraculously appear. Another newsflash: the Golden Age of Trek is over. Stop watching shit!If you continue watching mediocre crap, they will keep making utter shit! There will be no more good Star Trek until things get shaken up over at Paramount and Braga and Berman (finally) leave the franchise. They are soulless hacks. It is time for Paramount to find new blood to run the Trek franchise. Paramount must get someone who is talented, and who has a passion for Star Trek. Paramount will never change anything if fans continue to watch mediocre crap. They have no incentive to improve Star Trek. Voyager sucked and it had a good premise. Enterprise again has an OK premise and a good cast. Depsite this, it has so far shown itself to be lackluster. Don't watch! Hopefully, this will be the last of the Berman/Braga star Trek, and the next series or movie franchise will be run by people who give a damn. Barron out.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 6:18 p.m. CST

    Let me get this I attempt to quell my laughter

    by flowergirl

    The nice talkbalkers here are berating folks for watching "the crap that is Trek," as they are recommending that "Buckaroo Banzi" clone Farscape and that piece of cheeseball crap ANDROMEDA????!!! Thanks, but I'll still take Bakula over that Shakespearian dynamo Kevin Sorbo for the time being. I'll definitely put up with Connor Trinneer. As for Ms. Blalock, yes the lady is a ditz, but as long as she plays the part well, what's the diff? She is what she is.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 8:23 p.m. CST

    nah flowergirl

    by kojiro

    Give Farscape a shot. The writing is good, the dialogue is good, and the acting is good. Noit only that, but it's one of the ballsiest shows on tv. Who else is willing to have their central character go fucking nuts? (that was handled quite well too, over a period of months). Seriously, it's the best sci-fi out there right now; and the best since TNG by far. "Kill her John! Then we'll have margaritas and pizza!"

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 8:26 p.m. CST

    Trek and Sucking!

    by Lukecash

    I really don't understand why every here has a hatred of this show. Its got a pretty good cast and the effects are cool. I will let you know what I think of this epsiode once I see it. (i'm a west coast boy....) Mike Lukash

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 8:32 p.m. CST


    by Choda Boy

    For the love of Jeebus, would you lay off Farscape please? You watched it ONE time and didn't like it. Personal preferrence, I understand. But do you have to run it into the ground? I'm guessing you're a big Trek fan and were offended when the Talkbackers jumped on Enterprise. They don't like the show, big deal. But, I don't see anyone insulting the show the way you insulted Farscape and in a roundabout way, its fans. How would you like me to call Star Trek "a waste of time" or "hideously trite and infantile", "flowergirl"? You probably wouldn't, so I suggest you treat others and their favorite shows like you would want to be treated. Opinions like "I didn't like the show" are fine, but attacks are hurtful. And a "Buckaroo Banzai clone"? Is that supposed to be an insult or a compliment? I happen to like that show too.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 8:37 p.m. CST


    by Choda Boy

    When I said, "I like that show too", of course I meant "that movie". By the way, its a damn shame nothing ever came of the BB series for FOX.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 9:20 p.m. CST


    by Weasel

    So I'm watching "Enterprise" last week for the only reason that I do watch that show: the production design. As I'm watching, I realize that this so-called primitive, embryonic federation technology is waaaay better than anything Kirk or Spock ever had in the old series -and their time is supposed to be many, many years in Captain Archer's future. One begins to wonder, from a design standpoint, how gleaming chrome and cool graphics could devolve into cheap plastic and plywood sets a hundred years or so hence. So I'm thinking that it's really hard to reconcile this rather anomalous situation, when all of a sudden a massively heretical thought occurs to the old Weasel: why not take the old series and completely re-do it using today's technology and 21st century zeitgeist? Now before I'm taken to the stake and burned, please allow me to explain my position. I truly belive that a lot of old Trek really stands up, even today, but an equal amount of it is laughably bad. Oh, come on now, brother geeks, you know I'm right. Do titles like "Spock's Brain" or "The Children Shall Lead" not make you want to cringe in aesthetic terror? What I propose is taking the the Old Trek scripts and going over them line by line. Some classic teleplays like "City on the Edge of Forever" would survive in toto while the mediocre and horrifically bad stuff would undergo some major script surgery. In some cases, both the title and original premise would be used (the mediocre stuff) while in others (the very, very bad) only the episode's title would make it into the teleplay. Sure, it would be damnably hard, maybe impossibly hard, to find actors to recreate the original Kirk-Spock-McCoy chemistry, yet I persist in the belief that this retro-overhaul approach could yield some very interesting fruit. Blasphemous, I know, yet the thought haunts me.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 9:36 p.m. CST

    Great idea! Maybe!

    by scot_free

    Interesting proposal, Weasel. I doubt it could ever come to pass. My idea was to have an anthology series where different characters from the different series could make guest appearances. I think it would be interesting to see Crusher and Bashir together or an episode taking place on a Klingon starship. Suits would never go for though, not enough character continuity. Berman and Bragga could stay in charge but they must bring in some fresh blood, especially in the writing department. As for the current series, the writing is passable but its saving grace is the characters. In only five or so episodes they have made these characters very intriguing.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 9:46 p.m. CST


    by Weasel

    Thanks for the reply, bro! And, yes, you're right, nobody in their right mind (or in a position of authority) would ever go for my totally wacked out premise. Too expensive. Too heretical. Not only would the suits turn their noses up at it, but there would be geekboy riots from coast to coast as certain beloved episodes (and we all have our personal favorites and personal "stinkers")were gutted and re-tooled with sharper writing, far better production design and the benefit of thirty-something years of special effects technology. I'm afraid the only place I'm ever going to see this New/Old Trek is in my fevered, heretical mind. Later, Scot! May the gods take a likin' to ya, my brother!!

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 10:38 p.m. CST

    Hey, at least Archer didn't writhe in pain

    by vladvampire

    When he got hit a few times and nearly fell down, I said to myself, ho boy, here we go again, can't Archer even fight without looking wimpy, or writhing in pain? Even my wife who came in and asked what I was watching and then saw on the TV what it was and turned and walked away rolling her eyes said, man, his acting is so choppy. I told her it is a deliberate act to stop comedians from doing their Kirk impressions by starting their Archer impressions....LOL. The previews seemed to promise more than what was actually given. I could have sworn I saw in the previews Archer sitting on the edge of the bed stomping his boot on the floor to put it back on...;) Let's hope the previews for next week's episode live up to what they showed(which really wasn't alot except for Mayweather repeating some phrase like, leave my fellow spacers alone!...I am the only one who knows how to handle these people who have lived in space for so long) Yanno, this episode was so dull, I was actually humming the opening theme song since it was actually more exciting than the episode. But, yes, I am still gonna stick by it. Pretty kewl of T'Blah to have Trip beam the reactor into space in front of the Lizard King's ship and blow it up with a torpedo... I'm going to bed before I start humming Faith of the Heart again

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 10:45 p.m. CST

    My weekly defense of Enterprise

    by Hardyboy

    This wasn't a great episode, but I thought it was solid. As a matter of fact, as I was watching it, I found myself thinking that if the exact same storyline had been done on Voyager, it would have been lame, silly, and boring; but on Enterprise it worked. Why? Better characters and a better scenario. This story seemed more interesting to me because Archer and co. are far better characters than Janeway and her crew; and I've completely bought into the notion that we're seeing first contacts between earthlings and alien races. Other merits: this probably won't stop the cries that Archer is a candy-ass, but you got to see him do some authentic ass-whupping this time out. And am I the only one who found the villain with his monotone voice, pageboy haircut, and medieval tunic reminiscent of the villains of TOS? I swear to God, when he appeared on the large view screen and made his threats, I halfway expected Chekov and Sulu to appear on the bridge. Last of all: who is the chick who played the apothecary? I've seen her in a lot of commercials, usually in mom roles, and I've always found her an eyeful. . .nice to see Archer gittin' some for once.

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 10:46 p.m. CST

    V Guys

    by knumbersix

    For the most part, I

  • Nov. 14, 2001, 10:57 p.m. CST

    To boldy go again where no-one's gone before

    by corvette63

    These stories are SO BORING. Where is the imagination? Where are the great sets? Where are the interesting costumes? Every ep so far appears to have the budget of the first season of TSNG or be using sets and costumes left over from TSTOS.

  • Again, open the door to those who talk negatively. Bash Enterprise all you want, but it will still be made the way B&B want it. >>>This episode was good, but obviously not the best. It looks like this kind of episode has been done before. But it has set itself apart from those previous trek shows a little by being on a prequel. Why? For one thing, Tpol mentions that Vulcans do not contact pre-warp civilizations (which would carry over to the Federation's rules). This is said because it will eventually become one of the Federation's future rules. Then, we have a captain who is just doing what he thinks is right. He kisses the lady to cover his ass. He has a fist-fight with an alien. I wouldn't be suprised if we do see these 'V' aliens again. They seemed like a nice, rather ignorant race. The music was done very well. The beats and rifts fit the alien culture atmosphere. >>>I got a question off the subject of Enterprise. It is about Section 31. They said on DS9 that it was formed at approximately the same time that the Federation was formed. Now, they are supposed to be the first and last line of defense for Starfleet. Where were they when those creepy centipedes almost took over the federation in season 2 of TNG? Sure, you might say that they didn't have Section 31 in mind back then. What about Starfleet? I only saw a few admirals and high ranking officers in seasons 1-2 in TNG. Then, the Borg and Romulans showed up and Starfleet was bustling with admirals and support staff in later seasons. Give Enterprise a break! All trek series have started slowly. I know I too have been trying to say that Enterprise should go back to Earth now and then to mesh out what Starfleet (it's chiefs of staff) is forming into. Let's wait and see.

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 12:06 a.m. CST

    And what did we learn today, kiddies?

    by superninja

    That T'Pol has the makings of a great Captain. She kicked Archer's ass, x10. I was quite surprised that Jolene ('cause I can't spell her last name) was so commanding during this sequence. Archer had a nice pro-wrestling match, while his subcommander was running the show. This episode was incredibly slow in the first 1/3, and then got all action-packed in the last fifteen minutes. Well, bully for them. It's about time we saw the Enterprise throwing its weight around. But I would still say this episode is the worst of any so far. And I guess this ends all the rumors of Archer being the "gay" crew member, don't it?

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 12:14 a.m. CST

    The Current Status Of Sci-Fi

    by jcasnaw

    I like Enterprise and have watched every Trek Episode even the Animated series so I know the good of Trek and I know the Bad Of Trek. Enterprise I find it intresting it really is where no human has gone before. There is no real federation. Only know of a few alien races and the sky is the limit. Sure theres going to be episodes that are not as good as others but the first 6 episodes ive seen are pretty good. There has been lame instances but here are some ideas that have tweaked my intrest. A) Vulcans with Not set bookworm no emotions. B)Vulcans spying on some races C)The first meeting between Humans and Klingons D)Porthos That Dog is cute and why hasnt a captain had a pet before? It is slow starting but some of you talkbackers are so hard to please that they could be perfect shows and youd sit there going well sir I dont like it. Take a flying leap you overweight undersexed fucks and find the meaning of life and appreciate that the effort that goes into the show and though I agree some episodes blow there is still some that are pretty damn good. All else fails drop some estacy and watch Teletubies. Thats a enriching experience:)

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 12:14 a.m. CST


    by Prof. Pop-Cult

    This last episode felt very Voyagerish and I don't mean that in a good way. This script could have been used as a Voyager episode, just switch out Archer for Chakotay, and there you have it. I have now decided to check the upcoming episode listing and spoilers to see if an episode's story will be worth watching. Herc, in all seriousness, please do us a favor and tell us right away in your reviews if an episode deals specifically with the FutureGuy arc, or other cool things like the Andorians, for those of us who only want to keep up with these arcs. Life is too fuckin' short to waste on another 7 years of mediocrity. It's why I decided to drop X-Files this season, too.

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 12:58 a.m. CST

    Don't touch the Star Trek, the Original Series.

    by superninja

    That's right..."ORIGINAL". Something this series is not. Even for it's cheezy sets and bad dialogue, at least I felt they were exploring space, and not fucking Bakersfield, CA!

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 1:06 a.m. CST

    And while I'm on the subject, flowergirl hit the nail on the

    by superninja

    The only reason to watch this show week-to-week is Trip, unless you're jerking off to T'Pol. The supporting cast SHOWS signs of life in various episodes, but the only guy that delivers every time is Trip. I'm not sure who to blame. I'm sure the actors are competent, since we've seen them act in various episodes. All I can chalk it up to is the direction and writing. Star Trek has been too P.C. for too long. I know it conflicts with the ideaology of the series, but it's NOT REALITY!!! The Original Series had progressive and aggressive characters. Everything since (including TNG, which I enjoyed) are so freakin' repressed! Like the actor's talent has been bottled up in favor of "meaningful" storylines. I want to see some actors let go, not be trapped by the so-called rules that Star Trek has imposed on itself. Let's face it, the Original Series was just as much fantasy as it was sci-fi. They need to go back to their roots.***A poster above mentioned the silly names of the previous episodes. You're right, but the concepts, as you mention, STILL HOLD UP. THAT is what made Star Trek great, not technobabble and New Age philosophy.

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 1:24 a.m. CST

    Saw the ep. Not great, but better than Herc implied.

    by flowergirl

    It wasn't nearly as good as the last two, but it was better than Terra Nova. I liked that Archer kicked a little butt and that the writers are reminding us that not all alien races speak English. The "romance" wasn't nearly as bad as I feared, but the lizard guys seemed too Snidely Whiplash. What I LIKED was T'Pol proving herself capable in battle. I still can't understand those who dislike her character. The "enjoy your tea" line *was* funny and her admonishment of Trip that she had no intention of abandoning the captain was pretty great. I adore Trip, but he was insubordinate as hell. He may love his friend, but he deserved to get chewed out this time. I hope the writers keep developing the Trip/T'Pol tension. Also, does a good friend necessarily make a good officer in a crisis if he can't see the bigger picture? Trip would be a great character to explore that question with. All in all, I'll look back on this ep more favorably if they come back to this planet and find out whatshername blabbed. Need for a prime directive anyone?*****Okay, okay, to show you I'm not such a bitch I'll lay off Farscape and attribute it to different tastes. But please, you have to let me make fun of Andromeda with Kevin Sorbo. Come on, guys. Let me make fun of Andromeda. It's Kevin Sorbo.......

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 1:33 a.m. CST


    by flowergirl

    Yummy. Pardon me while I experience an estrogen flush, Superninja. Even when he's a bad, unprofessional insubordinate little boy he's good. Trinneer never seems to be sleepwalking through any lines. The character's just likeable, even when he's doing something wrong like contradicting his superior officer. You don't agree with his insurbordination, but his friendship with Bakula's Archer is so natural that you can appreciate why Trip did what he did. I've talked to a fair amount of Enterprise fans, female and male, and they all like the character.

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 2:31 a.m. CST

    continuity - "tellarites"

    by pasquino

    There was a continuity reference that I noticed - the alien miner guy attempted to insult Archer by asking if he was working for the Tellarites, who if I remember right are the somewhat porcine aliens from the original series' "Journey to Babel" and often are named in old-school trek fan stuff as one of the five founding races of the Federation (along with humans, Vulcans, Andorians and the Alpha Centauri folks). Speaking of, wonder if they'll ever come up, the supposed hominid aliens next door...

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 4:25 a.m. CST

    I can't believe nobody's mentioned...

    by infallible

    With all this talk about characters and character development, thought out stories, aliens acting like aliens, story arcs, and GOOD sci-fi, I can't believe nobody's mentioned BABYLON 5. I mean, an online Star Trek discussion isn't complete without some asshole singing the praises about Babylon 5. I shall be that asshole. Believe me, I was a die hard Star Trek fan until I saw B5. Those who have seen understand, those who haven't need to see. Aliens that look and act alien. Thought out stories. Interesting characters that actually develop. Real story arcs. The sci-fi we deserve. If your holding up Andromeda (not that innovative) and Farscape (they try, but it comes off as cheesy) as the benchmarks of modern sci-fi, then you need to check yourself. Enterprise will fall into the same dull routine that Voyager did because there's no creative juices left. (And for those of you who think DS9 was wasn't. They stumbled through the war "arc" and it was obvious they didn't know what they were doing. It wasn't at all thought out. DS9 had some great episodes, but 3 good ones and 20 stinkers a season do not a good a good series make.) Babylon 5 was good, different, gutsy, intelligent, planned, and entertaining. Yes, I watch Enterprise and I have the smallest of hopes that it will become a show that I will love. I watch because I do like Star Trek, in spite of the last 10 years, and I'm still interested in that universe. But watching makes me appreciate B5 that much more. We can watch Enterprise and the other mediocre stuff, but we should never settle for it. There is better stuff out there.

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 5:06 a.m. CST


    by billy_zardus

    For a Vulcan woman to get those procedures done is a tell tale sign of human vanity!

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 7:08 a.m. CST

    Linda Park

    by NNNOOO!!!

    First off: I like the show. I like the actors, I like the look. I really liked the way "Unexpected" geve us genuinely ALIEN aliens and I hope we see more of that kind of thinking behind the scenes. BUT... How is it that I'm the only one on this talkback to acknowledge the staggering beauty of Linda Park? And the agonizing way her (ill-conceived) character gets marginalized week after week? You Maxim boys can have Jolene!

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 8 a.m. CST

    In agreement on Linda Park

    by kdoc13

    Let me just jump on the Linda Park bandwagon. She should have more of a role on the show. I would hate to see her end up a prop for the whole run of the show kind of like Dr. Crusher or Chakotay. I really liked her in the ep where she was having doubts about being out there. It was nice to see a character on Star Trek show some emotion that didn't seem like it came from a computer chip...wait... Anyway, I will also agree, Linda is a very attractive woman. And a very natural woman. That is always a plus. I just don't get Jolene Blaylock. She is actually kind of freaky when not in the spandex as a 7 of 9 wannabe. Also, Harry, can we get the B5 people their own chat. Or at least some therapy. That show is over, the cheesy CGI spacship ain't coming back. Let it go...

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 9:04 a.m. CST

    It's not blasphemy - Bring back the old series!

    by dkmonroe

    I agree with Weasel - to a point. It would have been a great idea to "re-imagine" the original Star Trek with contemporary technology and new actors. There's nothing sacred about Bill Shatner's presence to make ST work. The original Enterprise crew has had 30 years of character development, and I'd like to think that these characters have reached the legendary status necessary that they can be interpreted by different actors. We already known who they are and what they act like, so there's no reason to spend two seasons "creating" them, which is about how long STNG spent becoming a good series. I don't think they should "re-make" the old episodes, however - the other ST series have made a cottage industry of that - I just think that Berman and Co. could make a really good, popular series by updating the original ST and writing some scripts that are more than two inches deep. C'mon, guys! We need a Star Trek on the level of "ER", and "West Wing", and none of these 2nd division knockoffs are going to fill the bill. Every ST series from STNG on has lumbered along on the borrowed capital of the original series, losing the audience (except for STNG), and obscuring Roddenberry's original vision. Star Trek inspired me when I was young, but I'd be suprised if any young people today could even sit through an episode of it - not because of its quality, but because of its datedness. This isn't neccessary! The original Star Trek is the best, and the story needs to keep being told. If not, then Star Trek is truly doomed to the museum of memory. Now, who do I write to?

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 9:31 a.m. CST

    Thank you.

    by White_Noise

    I understand why Enterprise is frustrating a lot of people. It just has a premise that cries out for a TOS kind of edginess and originality. I don't hate the show. In fact, I've enjoyed a few eps quite a bit. But, we must face it... It is peopled with Voyager mentality characters (for the most part, anyway. I'm on the Trip bandwagon too). Until they jetison completely the New Ageiness (which I see some evidences of) it will always be in the DS9-VOY mode.**** Oh, and thank those who mentioned Linda Park. She is so much more attractive than Blalock. Please B&B, let them flesh that character out!

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 11:36 a.m. CST


    by Weasel

    ...especially your comments that "Star Trek" should be more like "West Wing" or "ER." Well said, indeed! That level of dramatic writing is exactly what's needed for this latest incarnation of the ST mythos. However, I still stand by my idea of re-doing the old scripts by filtering them through today's sensibilities, SFX and production design. Correctly done, I think this could actually work. One other point that I've made numerous times on various Trek related talkbacks is the need for "real" science fiction writers to have some input into these scripts. I'm a big fan of writers like Greg Egan, Stephen Baxter, and Bruce Sterling and after reading the latest novel by one of these gentlemen, I always come back to "Trek" realizing how utterly pallid and painfully unimaginative its storylines are. Oh, and make room on the Linda Park bandwagon for the Weasel, guys! Lord, one look into those dark, liquid eyes and I'm absolutely lost! I fear this beautiful young woman is going to become the Lt. Uhura of the series, a marginalized (if I may steal that word from a previous poster)figure with little to do on this new series except stare at her control panel and mouth a line or two each episode. Man, if only Ms. Park had been chosen to play the Vulcan role on this series instead of the totally unengaging Jolene Blaylock. In my opinion, T'pol is just Seven of Nine without that plastic Borg thingie glued above her eye!

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 11:51 a.m. CST

    I liked this episode.

    by atomic-bananas

    It was competent. And I enjoyed watching it. If you disagree, then you have some chip on your shoulder. You hate everything after TOS, or you have some problem with Berman. This is a good, quality show. To let you know where I am coming from, I love TNG, I couldnt stand DS9, and Voyager was incredibly frustrating. So take that for what it's worth. Enterprise is a good show, and it's worth watching. Leave your prejudice at the door.

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 11:58 a.m. CST

    I am GLAD its not like the West Wing.

    by atomic-bananas

    That piece of shit show is just a mouthpiece for the liberal left wing. I dont hate liberals but I resent them masking their shitty propaganda as "must see tv". President Bartlet vetoes the "Estate Tax" errrrr death tax, here is why! Come on. That is the best tool the Democratic Party has for warping the minds of the unsuspecting public. Star Trek is no stranger to that- hell even this latest episode has a "EPA" tint to it. I didnt mind, though- but we need less of that. Not MORE of it!

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 12:33 p.m. CST

    I didn't mean that ST should mimic the politics of "West Win

    by dkmonroe

    ...Only that it should have the dramatic quality and the high standard of writing. Actually, I'm not a WW fan, but I still think it's well written. My major point is that ST should be at least equal to those shows as far as prestige goes. ST should be "must see TV", not just a subculture for subcultists (of whom I am chief, haha). And Weasel is firing on all cylinders again, suggesting that actual SCIENCE FICTION writers should be writing ST scripts. What a concept! They were practically standing in line to write for TOS. Do B&B read these posts? They jolly well should!!!

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 3:08 p.m. CST

    it could have been worse

    by KennethV

    The love story was extraneous but the episode wasn&#39;t terrible. As Knumbersix pointed out in an earlier post, they continue to make stupid continuity errors like picking up the crates with a huge brightly lit shuttle rather than transport them. They&#39;ve got that contest going on UPN to win an appearance on the show. I&#39;d love to win that just so I could trade the appearance for script approval for a few episodes. I&#39;m no freakin Aaron Sorkin or anything but I KNOW that I could do a better job avoiding stupid continuity/plausibility errors than they are. As for the actress playing Hoshi, sure she&#39;s cute and perhaps she&#39;s a good actress; but I don&#39;t know that cuz she&#39;s been given almost nothing to do except babysit Sluggo in the second episode and blather about "not being sure she wanted to be out there exploring". As the doctor rightly said at the time, "Maybe you should go back and teach then." I hope they go somewhere with that character but right now she&#39;s just annoying. T&#39;Pol, IMO, has been the only voice of reason in the entire crew. The writers are putting themselves in the position of having the Vulcan seem like a babysitter for an impulsive, reckless, unprofessional crew. I loved it when she walked up stunned the "apothecary" and when she had Trip beam the reactor in front of the alien ship. T&#39;Pol is the only character they&#39;ve shown to be resourceful and cool under pressure. I don&#39;t mind having characters show some doubt and hesitation occasionally but Archer and the rest can&#39;t seem to think themselves out of a wet paper bag without T&#39;Pol&#39;s help. As much as I like seeing T&#39;Pol as a strong character, the show needs to have Archer capaple of conducting diplomacy without his hand being held and they need to develop Trip&#39;s character into having a bit more military bearing. For cryin out loud, all these people have gone through a military academy of some sort and extensive mission training for this, why can&#39;t they act like it. <end rant> BTW, LMFAO @ atomic-bananas. It&#39;s pure comic genius to be able to say in one post, "leave your prejudice at the door" and, in the very next one, complain bitterly about those "left wingers corrupting the minds of an unsuspecting public." That&#39;s just brilliant. You&#39;re just bitter because the West Wing does a good job of presenting both sides of an issue, with a slight slant to the left of center that is unavoidable given the premise of a democratic administration. They don&#39;t single out the Republicans for unbased scorn in their show, and you shouldn&#39;t do it to the Democrats in this talkback. nuff said

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 3:57 p.m. CST

    What Herc Forgot to Mention

    by Lukecash

    Well, I actually enjoyed the epsiode very much. Granted it was a stand alone episode-wich is fine for Star Trek. Not every series needs to have a week to week continuity. It had a lot of great character interaction, Com girl getting excited about the laungauage. T&#39;pol and Trips argument. >>>>>But The main thing herc forgets to mention is THIS time Archer and Company Kicks serious ass...even though they are out gunned, and outnumbered. It wasn&#39;t a PC, New age thing at all...Archer was just making sure that the n It wasn&#39;t like the Data episode at all...they were just going to explore the planet quietly until they discovered the aliens tainting presence. Nice bit of detective work and action scenes. As for the aliens transporting the crates...perhaps the stuff cannot be transported... Or they were worried about the Transporters being picked up by the enterprise scanners. They might have transported them off earlier.

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 5:19 p.m. CST

    Enterprise is Great

    by Trapper Markelz

    I was a huge fan of TNG but both Deep Space Nine and Voyager fell flat with me. Enterprise has fully revived the Trekkie in me. Every episode so far has been great. I like the rugged feel of the ship, the crew and the missions. It excites me to think that there are years of Enterprise ahead. Finally a Sci-fi show out there I can stick with. Thanks UPN.

  • How a show soaked in the benefits of prewritten history can start off with a bang, twist it&#39;s ankle, limp and then fall flat on it&#39;s face nearly lifeless within a period of nine weeks is beyond me! And before all you Trekkies jump on me, let this Trekker lay one single word on you that justifies my P.O.V.: SMALLVILLE... SMALLVILLE takes a character with more than 60 years of background (literally THOUSANDS of stories told in all forms), goes back to his roots and consistently produces exciting, quality stories week after week. ENTERPRISE takes a UNIVERSE with over 30 years of history, goes back to it&#39;s roots and has nothing exciting or interesting to say...AND they even have the benefit of creating new characters each time! But they&#39;ve stuck to the same formula since DS9 when creating a crew: 7-9 in the main cast and that cast always includes 2-3 aliens... In ENTERPRISE we have two. Phlox ("I&#39;m still learning about human physiology.") as the ONLY doctor?!! Does he even have an assistant? What if he dies? What then? Wow, Starfleet really boned the crew if anything happens...Of course, perhaps he&#39;ll train an assistant a&#39;la VOYAGER... Then there is 7of9...I mean T&#39;Pol. Shouldn&#39;t the Vulcans have some sort of uniform, ceremonial robes or at least symbol of office for their emissaries? Does a logical race sit back and think "Hmmm...A tight form fitting uniform is perfect for an aesthetically pleasing Vulcan woman when she is traveling alone with Humans who largely rely on visual stimuli for attraction. They&#39;ll respect her." Don&#39;t get me wrong, I like to look at;Pol, but you can&#39;t tell me that the Vulcans &#39;evolved&#39; to wearing robes 100 years later? That&#39;s like saying Klingons started as large turtle-domed brutes and then transformed into small Asian-looking bullies 100 years later...*cough*...I could go on, but I&#39;ll cut to the quick: The show sucks + Offers nothing new + cannot follow a story arc with any efficiency + Boring characters + Waste of TALANTED actors + Ignores self created history more than THE X-FILES + Insults long time fans and new fans alike = VOYAGERIFIC!!! Remember, science supports the fiction in Science Fiction, not the other way around...and without good fiction, your story is as boring as a date with a science professor. AtomoPrime, out!

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 7:02 p.m. CST

    Why must we reverse-engineer apologies for bad science?

    by No-Op

    Sure, there&#39;s lots of reasons why the ailiens of the day might have to tractor-and-shuttle the goods instead of transport from orbit. But the fact is, they made not the slightest hand-wave about it, meaning to me that the producers/writers just don&#39;t care. ONE SENTENCE about the "photonic instability" of the ore could have covered it. But the real reason the aliens shuttled the boxes was so that Archer could see it happen. The reason the aliens transported up was to quickly close the departure scene. As long as the writers care more about making their plot come out on time than they do about creating a future world that makes sense, fanboys will have to invent excuses for things like this... or else they&#39;ll have to admit IT&#39;S ONLY A TV SHOW AFTER ALL.

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 7:37 p.m. CST

    Nothing compares to Farscape

    by orac_uk

    After 20 years of sitting through some great UK sci-fi, the various so-so Trek incarnations and ground breaking Babylon 5, I have to say that Farscape probably ranks as the finest sci-fi series I&#39;ve ever seen. It merges stunning images with crisp scripts and well defined characters. It even takes more risks than B5 did and handles humor a lot better. Farscape is free from useless Trek aliens with funny noses and pointy ears, more importantly Farscape has scripts that reach the parts Trek often fails to reach. Thankfully, UK critics are raving about Farscape and its generating the same buzz as season 3 of B5 did. Farscape has even overtaken B5 which I loved in the mid 90&#39;s but suffered from some wooden acting and too much spiritual, long winded speeches, though it always pissed over Voyager etc creatively. There is no clear good vs evil divide in Farscape but plenty of grey areas and its compelling TV. Despite its strong visuals and big budget effects, the writers never forget what makes a show really work and that is character dynamics and a &#39;villain&#39; like Scorpius has many levels as opposed to The Borg or Darth Vader who were essentially one dimensional. It still seems that the Trek writers have an awful lot to learn. We know that its easy to impress Trekies but the rest of us simply won&#39;t accept lazy TV like Enterprise.

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 8:11 p.m. CST

    The Maulurians couldn&#39;t transport because of the dampening f

    by flowergirl

    Pay attention if you&#39;re going to bash a plot hole. The Maulurians had a great deal of equipment to transport. How long would they have to turn off the *dampening field* which prevented transport and concealed the reactor? Quicker to use a shuttle in the middle of nowhere that can transport large amounts of equipment at once. As far as I knew most transporters in the 22nd century don&#39;t have wide dispersal beaming. They didn&#39;t want to risk the reactor being detected. Honestly, I can&#39;t imagine watching a show with such scrutiny that you can cite *so many* flaws and nitpicks. For people who don&#39;t watch Enterprise because you "aren&#39;t easily impressed" you sure seem to spend a LARGE amount of time dissecting and analyzing it. Last I heard, one had to watch a show to analyze it. I tried another tape of Farscape my friend made for me because of talkbackers&#39; continued praise. I thought "okay, I&#39;ll give it another chance." Different strokes for different strokes. Sorry, but the UK critics must be as easily impressed as Trekkies. Pure cheese. You must not have much in the way of television across the pond. I&#39;m not dissing those who like it, but it&#39;s not the be all end all.

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 8:45 p.m. CST

    nitpickers anonymous

    by KennethV

    Ok, now you&#39;re reaching Flowergirl. I&#39;m a trek fan, that&#39;s why I watch it, and nitpick it. I expect a certain level of plausibility in a show that purports to be "science fiction" rather than "space opera" like Star Wars. Your excuse about the dampening field is more full of holes than the episode. Why did they have the dampening field? It sure wasn&#39;t to keep the low-tech locals unaware of it&#39;s location. It certainly didn&#39;t help against the Enterprise&#39;s sensors since they detected the neutrino emissions from orbit. So what was the dampening field&#39;s purpose, aside from keeping the Enterprise from beaming Capt. Archer or the reactor out at a dramatic time? And if the aliens weren&#39;t willing to shut down the field to beam up the cargo and decided to cart it out of town, why didn&#39;t they just beam it up from there? Oh, and while I&#39;m nitpicking. When the lizard people&#39;s ship shows up they make some lame comment about not being able to detect it because it had been in geosynchronous orbit on the other side of the planet. That&#39;s just dumb. Given the exterior shots of the Enterprise in orbit, it had to have been in low orbit, which means it would have made a complete circuit of the planet every 90 minutes or so, meaning they would have been in line of sight of the lizard ship countless times. And while we&#39;re at it, how does that mesh with the comment at the beginning of the episode when they were deciding where they were going to go and they were somehow able to know that there were 500 million people on that planet while they were still 4.5 light years away. It&#39;s this kind of inconsistencies that they have no excuse for. That&#39;s why they have a technical consulting staff. None of these bits were essential to the story that they happen like that. They could have easily waited until Enterprise was in orbit to make the observation about the world&#39;s population....and so on. It&#39;s lazy writing, and that&#39;s all there is to it. The Star Trek audience is smarter than the average joe, give them some credit and start writing to a higher standard instead of shoveling us implausible BS.

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 9:11 p.m. CST

    &#39;Pure cheese&#39;

    by orac_uk

    Well flowergirl, you must be used to cheese after trying to defend another lame Trek spin-off based on a series from the 60&#39;s :) UK critics rarely praise anything and we have access to all the US imports that are worth watching. Interesting to note that the BBC (who have screened all Trek from the 60&#39;s onwards) passed on Enterprise decided instead to stick with Farscape. We know a good series when we see it. Fans here raved about B5 whilst it was still struggling to get a mention in the US. We all grew tired in the mid 90&#39;s of Trek that looked terribly tired compared to B5 and Farscape has now moved the genre into the 21st century. If you like your sci-fi bland and predictable, stick with Trek but some of us prefer a little depth and decent characters.

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 9:51 p.m. CST

    well, you certainly told me

    by flowergirl

    I&#39;m devastated. Please. You must have watched last night&#39;s episode 17 times to come up with all that. I was just offering up possible explanations. I don&#39;t hold Star Trek that bloody sacred. It&#39;s nice entertainment that keeps my mind off the war. Its two male leads are incredibly masculine and good looking. Sue me. It&#39;s better than Voyager was. Why is Star Trek being afforded sacred cow status? I don&#39;t judge my worth and intellectual prowess by my taste in SciFi. I just finished reading a book called "The History of Afghanistan." My IQ remains at a reasonably high level, even if I dislike Farscape. If you like it, fine, our tastes&#39; differ. It doesn&#39;t reflect on your IQ. That doesn&#39;t change the fact that I smell cheese when I watch it. I&#39;ll be damned, though, before I sit around for hours on end counting the inconsistencies and nitpicks I could find in Farscape, and I&#39;m sure there are plenty. Why waste my time?***BTW, having watched a British show called Absolutely Fabulous with the superb Jane Horrocks, I remain amazed that any UK critic could praise Farscape. Absolutely Fabulous is one of the most terrific shows I have ever seen to date--period. So was the British version of QAF for that matter. Now those are some great British programs.

  • Flowergirl, it only takes once through a show for most of us to find that 2 plus 2 equals whatever the plot requires today. That&#39;s careless writing. A show of this budget need not be careless. If they had ONE fewer effect shot per week and hired a script consultant with just a bit of appreciation for both SCIFI and TREK with it, they could providfe more satisfying shows for many of us by removing the irritating non-sequitors. What we are saying is that this is the type of show that is expected to appeal and be supported by the type of viewer who does care about consistancy and respect for the rules of the universe that supposedly gives rise to the story. If you are going to build a series about farming, farmers will react badly if you play havoc with details about planting and harvesting just to suit a plotline.

  • Nov. 15, 2001, 10:40 p.m. CST

    *oh dear*

    by flowergirl

    I am so glad that I watch Enterprise for the two hot stars, Trinneer and Bakula. I think that I shall enjoy Enterprise in perpetuity ever so much more than you poor guys--no matter what Berman&Braga write or no matter how the show is changed/improved. I confess, Bakula and Trinneer delicious masculine selves are worth a hundred employees who check the script for plot holes. I&#39;m even more evil than you previously believed. I don&#39;t care about the sanctity of Star Wars either!!! BWA HA HA HA HA!!!!! I hadn&#39;t thought about SW in 16 years. I only ventured to my local multiplex in hopes of ogling Liam Neeson&#39;s broad shoulders and Ewan McGregor&#39;s liquid sex voice. I&#39;m only going to see Episode 2 because McGregor&#39;s one of the sexiest things to ever come out of Scotland on two legs, his big mouth notwithstanding. It&#39;s true. I don&#39;t care about the sanctity of my science fiction. I am an evil heathen woman. BWA HA HA HA HA!!! Guys--I can appreciate that you enjoy your shows, but don&#39;t take it so seriously, okay? It leeches all the fun out of it. We all like what we like and dislike what we dislike. It&#39;s all good......or bad.

  • Nov. 16, 2001, 12:25 a.m. CST

    to flowergirl et al

    by knumbersix

    It seems a rather heated debate has resulted from my pointing out the transporter/shuttle nit. So, I suppose I should chime in again. I take my science fiction seriously ... when I&#39;m reading it. However, TV (and most films) are a very different matter. They&#39;re nice eye candy which I really don&#39;t hold up to a very high standard. But I get distracted when it becomes obvious that the writers of this eye candy are stupid. Or worse, when they assume that I am stupid and won&#39;t notice their laziness. A plot hole is a plot hole -- no amount of Monday morning quarterbacking in defense of these holes will stand up unless these excuses can be substantiated in the original. And none of those offered here can. Having said that ... I will continue to watch Enterprise. I will continue to enjoy it (especially its cast). But I will also continue to call its creators on the carpet every time I feel they are treating me ... and you ... like idiots. --Be seeing you.

  • Nov. 16, 2001, 2:16 a.m. CST

    here, here, Knumbersix

    by KennethV

    It&#39;s refreshing to find common ground in the ever contentious talkbalks. Flowergirl obviously ran out of excuses for the lackluster plot of this week&#39;s episode because she segued rather quickly into the "I watch the show because the men are hot" line of reasoning. You know, I may think Jolene Blalock is pretty friggin hot, but that&#39;s not the standard I&#39;m holding this show to. I don&#39;t need Enterprise to satisfy every quible of an Astrophysics PhD. I do need it to hold up to moderate scrutiny of a fairly intelligent science fiction audience. Enterprise is *not* doing that. It&#39;s such a small thing to fix that makes such a big difference (to some of us anyways) If all you want from your TV watching is some hotbods, do us all a favor and go rent some decent porn and relieve all that frustration you obviously are harboring. I&#39;m not taking this whole thing any more seriously than any other activity that takes an hour of my time. I obviously care just enough to post my opinions on this talkback; but then again, so are you. So which of us is taking this too seriously, I wonder? I am not a number, I am a free man!!

  • Nov. 16, 2001, 4:06 a.m. CST


    by flowergirl

    I&#39;ve run out of excuses? Oh, horrors. How shall I hold my head up in public ever again? I&#39;ve "resorted to the guys with hot bods line of reasoning"? Well slap my ass and call me Judy. How could I mention such a prurient thing in such a high minded place as AICN talkback where Jolene Blalock&#39;s breasts or extolling the virtues of Angelina Jolie&#39;s Lara Croft while typing with one hand is considered fair discussion. Give me a break, guys......have some fun and calm down. Science fiction is never going to be great art.

  • Nov. 16, 2001, 4:39 a.m. CST

    In Defense of FlowerGirl

    by Lukecash

    Okay, I hate to tell you people, but once they shut off the shield around reactor the enterprise COULD beam the damned thing up...the point being that the aliens obvioulsy couldn&#39;t beam up the stuff from the shop. So if you DON&#39;T mind adding two and two tegether, at one time the aliens probabbly moved the crates and beamed them up. Once they realize that the Enterprise was in orbit, they didn&#39;t want them to trace the transporter beam back to the mothership-thus they dispatched the shuttle. Really, I live with a bunch of die hard, phantom menance hating, babylon 5 fans-and they all like Enterprise. Heck even more importantly, the two non-trek fans that visited us last night enjoyed the show. The whole point of Enterprise is NOT to suck up to the scifi/trek fans. It is a show that appeals to ALL sorts of people. SO LAY OFF OF FLOWERGIRL IF SHE LIKES THE DAMN SHOW! God knows I don&#39;t like Buffy, nor Smallville, I complained about the thee episodes i watched-then stopped watching the show. So if you don&#39;t like it, don&#39;t watch it.

  • Nov. 16, 2001, 9:35 a.m. CST

    TOS and this

    by AcidJokers

    You know what I got a kick out of? The Kirk style fight between Bakula and that Alien. The show has little corny things like that, but things like this are exactly what made the first season so great. Sure the Sci/Fi was has ALWAYS been a littled relaxed but most of the time the stories aren&#39;t about the science, anyway.

  • Nov. 16, 2001, 9:36 a.m. CST

    When I said season I meant series.

    by AcidJokers

  • Nov. 16, 2001, 9:39 a.m. CST


    by knumbersix

    I&#39;d like to reiterate something that seems to have been misunderstood ... especially by you, Lukecash. I LIKE the show. I ENJOY the show. I eagerly look forward to it every week. I never expect it to be perfect. And I have no problem accepting some flaws, or even occasional glitches in continuity if there appears to be a purpose for them. But I will not tolerate having my enjoyment of the show tainted by writers who are lazy ... or just plain dumb. The transporter/shuttle problem is a perfect example of lazy writing, nothing more, nothing less. No reverse engineered excuse even comes close to holding water. They use a shuttle because a transporter beam might be detected??? WHAT!??! Why would a shuttle be any harder to detect than a brief flash of transporter energy. They tracked a Suliban vessel across the friggin galaxy in the first episode, for filk&#39;s sake! And, even if this terribly lame excuse were the reason a shuttle was used, it should have been offered in the script. And flowergirl, what can I say? Science Fiction will never be high art? Why the hell not? As loathe as I am to personal attacks, I suggest you pick up a book now and then. Some science fiction has already attained the status of high art -- even in film. But, if all you&#39;re looking for is Baywatch in Space, I suppose a toothy grin and hard abs set against some gleaming console with a few stars streaking by in the window will be enough to satisfy you. Oh ... and thanks for the support, Kenneth V. Like you, I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. --Be seeing you.

  • Nov. 16, 2001, 9:58 a.m. CST


    by knumbersix

    I&#39;d like to reiterate something that seems to have been misunderstood ... especially by you, Lukecash. I LIKE the show. I ENJOY the show. I eagerly look forward to it every week. I never expect it to be perfect. And I have no problem accepting some flaws, or even occasional glitches in continuity if there appears to be a purpose for them. But I will not tolerate having my enjoyment of the show tainted by writers who are lazy ... or just plain dumb. The transporter/shuttle problem is a perfect example of lazy writing, nothing more, nothing less. No reverse engineered excuse even comes close to holding water. They use a shuttle because a transporter beam might be detected??? WHAT!??! Why would a shuttle be any harder to detect than a brief flash of transporter energy. They tracked a Suliban vessel across the friggin galaxy in the first episode, for filk&#39;s sake! And, even if this terribly lame excuse were the reason a shuttle was used, it should have been offered in the script. And flowergirl, what can I say? Science Fiction will never be high art? Why the hell not? As loathe as I am to personal attacks, I suggest you pick up a book now and then. Some science fiction has already attained the status of high art -- even in film. But, if all you&#39;re looking for is Baywatch in Space, I suppose a toothy grin and hard abs set against some gleaming console with a few stars streaking by in the window will be enough to satisfy you. Oh ... and thanks for the support, Kenneth V. Like you, I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. --Be seeing you.

  • Nov. 16, 2001, 1:06 p.m. CST

    Thank you Luke Cash

    by flowergirl

    I appreciate it. I&#39;m not so very terrible when you get to know me. It&#39;s not as if I think Enterprise is perfect, but if you look at the episodes of the sacred cow TOS you can find something to pick apart plotwise or concerning science in *every* single episode if you put some thought into it, e.g......why didn&#39;t they use the shuttlecraft to pick up Sulu from the freezing planet in "The Enemy Within"? Well, maybe they stopped using them after Archer&#39;s time, consdiering them unneeded. Well, gosh, why didn&#39;t they ADDRESS that issue in "Galileo Seven" when the shuttlecraft was used? "We recognized a further need to use shuttlecrafts on starships." Why didn&#39;t the writers mention that for continuity&#39;s sake? Sometimes you have to fill in the blanks a little and suspend disbelief in scifi entertainment. Why did Kirk& co. assume there were no more "onlies" *anywhere* on that planet in Miri? How about scanning for life forms? How is it that these onlies just happened to work near the building where the doctor who headed the "life prolongation project" worked who kept notes on the whole thing? Why did Miri and that oldest boy who would catch the disease once they entered puberty look like they were 25 years old? I&#39;m not saying that shows can&#39;t have plot holes that are too big too ignore (gravity comet, gravity comet); all I&#39;m saying is that you have to extrapolate a little when it comes to scifi (the T&#39;Pol/Trip interaction was the point of that episode anyway). The dampening field was in place. Maybe the other species felt that the danger of another advanced species discovering the reactor and beaming it away was greater than some pre-industrial local yokel "seeing an alien."***BTW, I tried Smallville as well seeing as I&#39;m such a fan of its lead in, "Gilmore Girls." I gave it a couple of eps and didn&#39;t like it so I stopped watching. It works well, doesn&#39;t it?

  • Nov. 16, 2001, 1:34 p.m. CST

    Numbersix-just to clear up

    by Lukecash

    Number Six:That post wasn&#39;t directed at you in particular...more for those who were trashing flowergirl for liking enterprise. As far as your point about the shuttle-I can understand what you mean. I think if the aliens didn&#39;t show they had transport technology, the whole show would make sense. Something tells me that they went for the quick transport to expidite the story...and that is poor writing. >>But if it is any consolation-the aliens were a heck of a lot dumber than the Enterprise. They didn&#39;t notice that the Enterprise has entered the orbit or even scanning. In fact the enterprise shuttle manage to land outside of the city without anyone noticing. This might mean Shuttles are harder to pick up. T&#39;pol only noticed the effects of the radiation, not the actual reactor itself. >>However, to make another point-the enterprise knew the other ships warp signature-and that&#39;s how they tracked them down. Before the ship was sitting off of their asses, and they didn&#39;t even see it.>>Flowergirl: Yes, the powere of not watching a show does wonders for the mind,eh?

  • Nov. 16, 2001, 1:39 p.m. CST

    Plot holes (and where can I get one of them BEAST IMPLANTS?)

    by tbrosz

    If you wanted to start pointing out plot holes in TV Science Fiction, you would probably have to quit your job and do it full time. Most TV writers are fairly dim, and it&#39;s lucky they can manage it at all. And Star Trek has so much continuity baggage accumulated over the years that even a good writer would get bogged down. By the way, the whole Star Trek technological advancement timeline makes no sense anyway. First warp drive was supposedly in about 2063, and the Enterprise D was commissioned over 300 years later(!) Considering we have gone from the Wright Flyer to the Space Shuttle in less than 100 years, without replicators or other advanced tech, then the Star Trek universe seems hopelessly technologically retarded.

  • Nov. 16, 2001, 1:41 p.m. CST

    flowergirl, flowergirl, flowergirl ...

    by knumbersix

    Science Fiction (or any fiction, for that matter) works only when you care about the characters portrayed, or the story being told. For the most part, I have cared about the stories being told on Enterprise. The gravity on the comet didn

  • Nov. 16, 2001, 2:19 p.m. CST


    by General Idea

    His antennae are great, but his suit should have been made to make him look bigger. Like mutant-big. And where&#39;s all the assorted silly superheroes in the background? I want to see the Human Bullet dammit. That was great about the comic and the animated series. He should use his Puddy voice from Seinfeld also, instead of this new one. It&#39;s too dopey. He needs to SOUND like he knows what he&#39;s talking about, even though everyone else can see he&#39;s a dimwit. Arthur and Batmanuel look great however. Wait....this isn&#39;t the Tick talkback??? Oh that&#39;s right....THERE ISN&#39;T ONE!!!! <GRRR>