UPDATED!! Cameo in ENTERPRISE Pilot''
Our old pal “Viacom Girl,” thus far a highly reliable source when it comes to all things “Star Trek,” offers this:
It looks like James Cromwell is poised to reprise his role of "Zephram Cochrane" from "Star Trek: First Contact" in the premiere episode of "Enterprise". In it, Dr. Cochrane makes a supposedly stirring speech that sends this first crew of explorers on their way.
This despite the fact that Cromwell is busy starring in own new series, “Citizen Baines,” a new hourlong from the “ER” folks that premieres on CBS this autumn.
UPDATE! Viacom girl added this on Monday:
Some people are posting their confusion about how James Cromwell's Cochrane character from "First Contact" can appear in "Enterprise," since the series takes place some time after the initial meeting with the Vulcans.
Cochrane is seen on archival footage giving a speech that invokes something close to the phrase: "To boldy go..." and I think you know the rest. Therefore, the current "Star Trek" team attributes Captain Kirk's legendary TOS opening to early words of Cochrane. I have mixed feelings about it, but that's the way the Romulan cookie crumbles.
Readers Talkbackcomments powered by Disqus
+ Expand All
June 24, 2001, 6:48 p.m. CST
by Jonny Quest
I enjoyed Cromwell as Cochrane, and it'll be neat to see him as the less mercenary, more heroic guy all the Starfleet people were raving about in "First Contact."
June 24, 2001, 7:14 p.m. CST
James Cromwell is great actor and him returning as Zephram Cochrane is the coolest thing to happen to Star Trek since James Cromwell was in First Contact. I WILL WATCH!
June 24, 2001, 7:20 p.m. CST
well, allow me to be the first one to nitpick about Enterprise's continuity (or lack thereof). Okay, Cochrane did his warp flight in 2063 (and he wasn't young then.) According to accepted geek canon, the birth of the federation (around which the show is supposed to revolve) happened circa 2160. How will Mr. Cochrane be able to give them a stirring speech? Oh, wait, i know how. We simply have the writers throw anything accepted out the window and do their own thing. Am I jumping the gun? Yep. But I still think this show is screwed before it even gets out of the gate. (Or spacedock, as the case may be.)
June 24, 2001, 7:59 p.m. CST
I hate to nitpick a nitpick, but the stuff I've seen about the timeline leeds me to believe that this series takes place well before the founding of the Federation. This is more about Earth exploring our little corner of the galaxy with the help of the technologically superior Vulcans. One of the major plot points released so far is about Capt. Archer's dislike of the Vulcans for giving Earth too much help. If the relationship between the Federations two strongest allies is still in its embryonic stages, then the founding of the Federation could be as long as 50 or 60 years away, placing the series easily within Cochrane's lifetime. Of course sinse Cochrane lives to be over 200 years old (as stated when he meets Kirk and Co. in the Classic episode "Metamorphosis"), the possible continuity error is whether Enterprise takes place before Cochrane tires of his celebrity and mysteriously heads off for parts unknown.
June 24, 2001, 8:01 p.m. CST
by Anakin Whoopass
I thought Enterprise was to take place well BEFORE the founding of the Federation. In fact, this cameo would suggest that it's very early in the 22nd Century. The Okudas' Star Trek Chronology picked the year 2117 as the date when Cochrane decides to run away from civilization, not to be seen again until the TOS episode "Metamorphosis". (In that episode, which the Okudas date to 2267, the rejuvenated Cochrane told Kirk & crew he had left 150 years prior.) The Okuda Chronology was published in 1993 and is dated, but I notice First Contact deviated only two years from Okuda's estimated date of 2061 for Cochrane's first warp flight, so an early 22nd Century start for Enterprise featuring Cochrane still works.
June 24, 2001, 8:02 p.m. CST
....and then, according to the Original Series (which probably explains everything) Cochrane left Earth to die in space 150 years before the Kirk Enterprise. Sad that I know this, but I bought this trivia book for a plane trip and it's great toilet reading. But hey, the Original Series never really happened, right, Mr. Berman?
June 24, 2001, 8:09 p.m. CST
I watched Harry in that home-made Tigger movie thing he did, and it gave me nightmares last night. Full blown nightmares. Damn you Harry.
June 24, 2001, 8:23 p.m. CST
Man, that would be SOOO freakin cool if he said that. (think back to the FC cockpit scene between Riker & Zefrham). Well, this would KIND of make sense, cuz, if you think about it, each spinoff has had a character from a pervious show be in the pilot episode. TNG = McCoy. DS9 = Picard/ENTERPRISE VOY = Quark/DS9. So yeah, I think a cameo is a high posiblity. Me? I'm pumped for ENTERPRISE. The concept sounds really cool and every anoucement so far has just gotten me more pschyed.
June 24, 2001, 8:25 p.m. CST
by Anakin Whoopass
Reading further in Okuda's book, apparently Cochrane told Kirk he was 87 years old when he decided to disappear. Which would mean he was only in his early 30s when he made his first warp flight. Which sounds good on paper since most geniuses achieve early, but is contradicted by the casting of James Cromwell, who was 56 (and looking older) when First Contact was released. If he's appearing on Enterprise, Cromwell will be 61 and, I guess, playing Cochrane as being in his 90s or 100s. If you figure Cochrane just looked old for his age and was actually in his 40s in First Contact, then it's still barely possible for it to be the very early 22nd Century and for Cochrane to appear prior to his disappearance at age 87, if you don't try to stick to the Okudas' exact dating.
June 24, 2001, 8:39 p.m. CST
You know, it's difficult to believe the stuff coming from AICN's sources re: the ENTERPRISE pilot. Derek Flint claims to have read a script, and didn't say anything about a scene with Cromwell. In fact, he didn't say much about the script at all. Viacom girl claimed the Bakula deal was dead a week before it was announced. Is this new rumour to be believed?
June 24, 2001, 9:18 p.m. CST
Don't you know that playing around with warp fields can make you age prematurely due to time warping effects! That's why Cochrane looks much older than he actually is in First Contact! (and that's why he drinks too) because he lost part of his youth!
June 24, 2001, 9:34 p.m. CST
by Darth Brooks
Am I wrong, or does this new series James Cromwell is in sound like he's playing Al Gore? http://www.tvdads.com/tvdfall.html
June 24, 2001, 10:04 p.m. CST
And screw continuity, Cochrane kicking off the series would be welcome. Personally, I would have preferred the writers of "First Contact" to model him after the book "Federation", a fantastic novel that should have been made into the crossover movie. He was less comical and a much more realistic character. If you are interested on a really well-done take on the whole chaotic mess that takes place after Khan and before the birth of the Federation, I highly recommend the book.
June 24, 2001, 11:30 p.m. CST
Pulling out my Star Trek Encyclopedia, Cochrane's first Warp flight took place in 2063 and Cochrane disappeared in 2117. The new series is set around 2150 so Cochrane would have been missing for quite a while. Maybe they have some archival footage of him at a previous historic launch and they're using it as a image for the launch of the new Enterprise. Sort of how they always replay John F. Kennedy's big "go to the moon" speech.
June 25, 2001, 12:08 a.m. CST
it's more like 2110, so an appearance by Cochrane would be perfect!
June 25, 2001, 12:39 a.m. CST
If Enterprise takes place in about 2110 with Cochrane sending them off, maybe the climax to season 7 will be the cirumstances surrounding Cochrane's departure. Or not.
June 25, 2001, 1:36 a.m. CST
by Bored Warrior
Timmer, calm down. First of all, Derek Flint's review was spoiler free, although he was the first to reveal that the ENTERPRISE pilot was about the first Klingon meeting. He also confirmed it was a prequel even people like yourself were claiming it wasn't. As far as Viacom Girl saying the Bakula deal was off, she was right because the trades confirmed it -- and she correctly let everyone know when the deal was on track again. I believe they've worked James Cromwell into the ENTERPRISE pilot, despite whatever timeline lapses that may cause, since the Borg Queen got killed and she wound up in the finale of VOYAGER. My guess is Cromwell's character appears in historic footage, just like some wiser than you Ain't It Cool News posters has guessed. I think Viacom Girl rules and I want to hear more from her. Write more often, girl!
June 25, 2001, 1:45 a.m. CST
by spike fan
Make me belivie that this show will sink and that is BERMAN and BRAGGA.Yes the show looks an interesting concept. But the Concept for Voyager was the most interesting concept of all the Star Trek shows and yet Berman and Bragga still managed to fuck up Voyager in to used cheessy crap. SO my hopes will not be high.
June 25, 2001, 5:21 a.m. CST
Isn't there a rumour out there the the "Enterprise" pilot starts with a flashback to Archer/Bakula
June 25, 2001, 5:56 a.m. CST
It was a video message. This is based on a review posted in Darkhorizons.com.
June 25, 2001, 6:03 a.m. CST
I had a thought. If indeed Cochrane is present at the launch of this new/old Enterprise, isn't there the posibility that Cochrane himself had a hand in the naming of this ship? And perhaps, just perhaps, he chose a name based on his encounter with "another" Enterprise some years before. By that reasoning, all the Enterprises before or since, were so named as the result of the Enterprise E's trip back to Cochrane's time. Freaky!!!
June 25, 2001, 6:23 a.m. CST
I still couldn't care less about this series whatsoever. Let me refer everyone once again to Shatner's collaborative efforts with the Garfield Reeves-Stevens. Read those and remember what real Star Trek is like. In there you will also find a much more tantalzing twist on the whole Cochrane thing. (not to mention many others!)
June 25, 2001, 7:39 a.m. CST
You all oughta read the excellent review by Garth over at Dark Horizons. If all this stays the way it's supposed to according to Garth's review, this series may actually revive Star Trek. Read it, it is an excellent review with a few spoilers but not enough of them to destroy your viewing of the pilot in a few months.
June 25, 2001, 8:27 a.m. CST
Think about it: Khan's takeover of the world was supposed to have occured during the 1980s or 1990s (I forget which), and as TNG and DS9 evolved, everyone conveniently forgot that no one in the Federation had even SEEN a Ferengi before Picard and co. met them. . .so chill out if an appearance by Cochran in the new series doesn't "fit." Actually, my concern is that Roddenberry launched TNG with an appearance by the ancient Dr. McCoy. How 'bout some originality, Berman?
June 25, 2001, 8:41 a.m. CST
"We've reached warp and made First Contact Mr Cochrane!" "That'll do pig..."
June 25, 2001, 9:11 a.m. CST
everything I hear about the pilot sounds cool, and all reviews have been good so far (Aside from that rant passing as a review on AICN that was posted here). Still the DARK HORZIONS review is excellent, and if this series is going to be more action I'm down with that. The villian sounds really interesting (espically when it turns out that they're getting thier marching orders from someone in the future!) And I have enjoyed most of the pilot episodes of all the series, but this one sounds like the ass-kickinist pilot of them all. and if the rest sucks, hey, at least we have a good 2 hours. (and I also agree, Trek continuity will make you head explode like an overripe mellon)
June 25, 2001, 9:18 a.m. CST
Even T'Pau? Z. Cochran? What a terrible film...screw continuity, what I want to know is how you make the mighty Cromwell boring? A travesty.
June 25, 2001, 9:21 a.m. CST
The Trektoday site posted the assumption that Cochrane's appearance may take place via some sort of historical video where he says: "...to boldy go where no man has gone before." James Cromwell has made various guets shots on Trek since TNG episode The Hunted. He returned for 2 episodes in Next Gen's last season and did 2 or three DS9 episodes. It would be nice to see him return as Cochrane, but let us hope its through a history video than him really being at the launch.
June 25, 2001, 9:46 a.m. CST
Something that feels at least a little like the Original Series? I'm tired of all the dark, sci-fi on t.v. I want the old action/adventure style back. Forget Berman's New Age hokum.
June 25, 2001, 10:22 a.m. CST
T'Pau IS in it. Just read Garth's review over at Dark Horizons and it looks like I'm getting my way with the action/adventure stuff. And yet ANOTHER alien race. I hope they take time to focus on the Human/Vulcan relations. I would really like to see how these cultures first view each other.
June 25, 2001, 10:48 a.m. CST
i give props to sam beckett out of quantum leap - can't remember his name - mental block. he's a good actor. but i hope he doesn't just carry the whole of this enterprise. it sounds like people are trying to milk the star trek cow which hasn't looked entirely healthy the past few years. if they want ratings, the way to go is set it in the future, where war is tearing up the star trek universe....on a fatter scale than deep space nine. heavy effects and battles is what people want...not some begining of the series. THATS how to get ratings
June 25, 2001, 11:56 a.m. CST
Everything I've heard suggests Cochrane will appear in recording form...either Video or Holographic. That's keep continuity hounds happy. Oh yeah, and the Shatnerverse Star Trek books are crap.
June 25, 2001, 12:02 p.m. CST
But the Cochrane's age issue can be solved really simply by using the explanantion of the relativistic effects of near-light or light speed travel. But the current Star Trek team are probably way too stupid. Or maybe I'm stupid for trying to think of a reasonable explanation that doesn't involve inverted poly-morphic techulon particles.
well, I realised right after I posted that it could be plausible for Cochrane to be there, but I still think that the writers are stretching it. Anyway, I'm just not excited about this series at all, so that could be why I'm trying way too hard to find things to complain about.
June 25, 2001, 12:18 p.m. CST
the new series has lots of scenes with people standing around, looking at computers, and having ten minute conversations about technical details.
June 25, 2001, 2:55 p.m. CST
by Ogami Itto
June 25, 2001, 3:38 p.m. CST
June 25, 2001, 3:42 p.m. CST
Good 'ole Rick Burman will fuck this entire series by bringing in the Borg for a "ratings coup". Piss off Rick Burman...I hope you burn in Hell!!!
June 25, 2001, 4:26 p.m. CST
Whats next a cameo from Kirks Great Grand father and he be played by William Shatner. Oh brother. What Braga and Berman will do to get viewers on the out of gas franchise.
June 25, 2001, 5:20 p.m. CST
You haven't seen Jolene Blalock's Maxim pics, have you? http://www.maximonline.com/girls_of_maxim/girl_621.html
June 25, 2001, 6:13 p.m. CST
by Si Rowe
T'Pau's not in the show, as far as we know. In early drafts, the Vulcan character on the show was called T'Pau (may or may not have been supposed to be the same T'Pau), but now she's called T'Pal. As for why we get Zefram Cochrane instead of Sarek or T'Pau -- easy. The actors who played Sarek and T'Pau are both dead. Sure, they could recast the roles (as Cochrane was recast for First Contact), but why bother?
June 25, 2001, 9:03 p.m. CST
The point is that Cochram was a very goofy character from TNG movie (albeit played by a talented actor who was wasted), and has no weight for me from a historical perspective. Seriously, big deal. However, I'm in the minority here, I'm sure. As I get older, TNG gets less interesting and the OS gets more entertaining.
June 25, 2001, 9:53 p.m. CST
Why worry about continuity with Cochrane at all? After all, they already ruined that with First Contact. In the old series, Cochrane was not from Earth... he was from Alpha-Centauri.
June 25, 2001, 9:59 p.m. CST
Ok gang here's my idea that would've at least softened the continuous SHATTING ON THE FANS from BermanBraga- if I make any timeline and continuity errors please feel free to correct me- since the original Enterprise was a Constitution-Class starship the new series ship should have been the USS Constitution, the first long range warp drive ship. Captain Archer should have a young officer with the last name April who is either the father or grandfather-depending on the timeline- of the original continuity first captain of the Enterprise Robert April. Obviously the show would need another title since Star Trek Constitution sounds lame. Would it have killed BermanBraga to do a simple thing like that to honor the fans who consider the animated series part of continuity? Some folks will comment that UPN needs the Enterprise name for "brand recognition" but that didn't stop coma inducing drivel like Deep Space 9 and Voyager from torturing us for the past 150 years! Anyhoo, I'm glad Cromwell will be in the pilot, at least he'll bring some class to the first episode. Besides if they really wanted to follow continuity they would've hired Glen Corbett to reprise his Zefram Cochran role, but the funny thing is Corbett would've look older than he was in the original series episode "The Companion." Then again, for all I know Glen Corbett died twenty years ago!!
June 25, 2001, 10:55 p.m. CST
by Jonny Quest
How much nicer it is to read these talkbacks without a bunch of jackasses all going "FIRST!" "FIRST!" "FIRST!"
June 25, 2001, 11:40 p.m. CST
It is rumored Sherrie Lansing liked DS9 the most. I hope if the evil Braga does his usual tacheon gravametric crapfest with ENTERPRISE, Lansing will have him fired and bring back the writing team from DS9. Hey, a guy can dream. Plus, it is nice to read these much nicer boards. Maybe Trek fans are geeks, but we're quality geeks.
June 25, 2001, 11:54 p.m. CST
by Sir Mordred
that even worse than the people who say "FIRST"- which really isnt that bad- are the people who can't stop bitchin' about it. What the fuck does it matter to you if you skip the first post or not?
June 26, 2001, 12:55 a.m. CST
by The Gay Nazi
June 26, 2001, 1:12 a.m. CST
by Jonny Quest
I wouldn't mind it so much if it were ONLY the first people who posted that were commneting about being first. When the first dozen folks are all saying "FIRST!" I find it rather annoying. That's why I didn't do it when I happened to be the first one to post this time out. The only reason ANYONE is ever first on these talkbacks is dumb luck. I don't understand people acting like it's an actual accomplishment.
June 26, 2001, 6:53 a.m. CST
Screw the Burman crap, for a great storyline check out the Shatner/Garfield Reeves-Stevens series of novels. Star Trek: Odyssey -
June 26, 2001, 7:36 a.m. CST
Not that talking about the First people isn't productive, but getting back to Enterprise I have a few remarks. First, the date of 2110 or there about is news to me. I thought Enterprise was set "a hundered years before Kirk" which would make it around 2150. Frankly, I think that if they want to reenergize the franchise then they need to be more considerate about these things. I have no problem seeing Cochrane in some way shape or form(though I hate what they did to Trek chronology and history in First Contact), but I'd prefer, if the show is set circa 2150 that he really is just a video image.****** Bored Warrior, you mentioned the continuity time line stuff was twisted by the Borg Queen showing up on Voyager's final ep. Actually, the Borg Queen was in more than just the last episode of Voyager, and the suggestion was that while she did die in body there in First Contact, she can't really die because she is the collective. So her return isn't an error per say. I do think that Braga refuses to develope the Borg Queen beyond her rather cryptic remarks, making the character needlessly elusive unsatisfying. Is she connected to Seven of Nine's mother beyond the normal assimilation process? Why is Seven of Nine so special to her? What was she offering Picard if it wasn't just a normal connection to the collective through assimilation? Is there a hierarchy to the assimilation process? Why doesn't the queen know that many many more drones have left the collective other than Seven? I'm convinced Braga just isn't a very good writer. He likes being ambiguous and flat out wierd, and it doesn't work the way he thinks it does. If he has answers to these questions, he should use them!**** Spikefan, while Berman and Braga didn't do anything really remarkable with the Voyager Premise, I think that was largely because they didn't work on Voyager for the first several seasons. That falls on the shoulders of Jeri Taylor, who loved cliches and episodic, disconnected, bland storytelling. She made most of the characters into the flat unchanging drones that many of them still are(Harry Kim didn't change from series start to series end). For all that she did a better job of the Janeway character than Braga, but overall Taylor began the mess that Braga wasn't able to clean up(though he should have been). Maybe Braga will handle a show he initiated better, since he blaims Voyager's shortcomings on its premise. I don't have much faith in him, but we'll see.****Maxwell Demon, I don't see how Roxanne Dawson's involvement in Enterprise automatically ruins the show. If she were indeed playing B'eleanna then I'd agree with you that it's a mistake. But you admit that you don't know for sure what her casting is, so I think you're jumping to a harsh judgement too quickly(though I know it's easy to worry). She's a decent enough director, so I don't have a problem with her being involved. And just because they've all be contracted to say nice things about Enterprise doesn't immediately mean they're covering for a bad show either. Try to keep an open mind for now.****** big-v, while I loved DS9, I don't think that we need to see more war. Trek wasn't about war, it was about exploring and uniting together despite our differences to accomplish that goal. Now, a series set after the Dominion War, where Federation, Klingon, Romulan, and Cardassian characters are sent to explore the Gamma Quadrant together would be interesting. There was a lot left to resolve after DS9 that hasn't been touched since, not even by Voyager's numerous flashes to the Alpha Quadrant. But I don't think we need more war, DS9 explored it enough for now.***** Si Rowe, did you ask why bother showing a younger Sarek or T'Pau or are you just questioning the idea of recasting those characters? Seeing familiar players in the Trek Universe that aren't mere crossover stunts is one of the big advantages to the Enterprise premise! I think a younger T'Pau, perhaps the sister of Enterprise's T'Pal perhaps, would be a great idea. I'm sorry they aren't using T'Pau herself as it would have added to the epic nature of Star Trek. But Berman and Braga have NEVER been the types to plan years in advance like that. I think it's clear they don't want to have a regular character whose future is already set--which is their mistake in my opinion. But Enterprise's main appeal for me, and many others, is that it could expand on the mythology of Star Trek in a different way than a show set after Voyager would. It can go back revist points in Trek history that until now have only been mentioned vaguely. The only speed bump is this disrespect for the established canon chronology, a disrespect they wouldn't have I think if these were the guys who created Trek to begin with. Now Sarek, I'll grant you I don't think he could appear as anything but a child. He was supposed to be two hundred years old in TNG, and if Enterprise is set at least two hundred years before TNG then he'd be only an infant around the time of the pilot. I know I'm making something out of continuity, which BermanBraga have shown utter disrespect for, but it's NEXT GENERATION continuity! They should care about sticking to continuity that was established in Berman's own reign at least.
June 26, 2001, 11:43 a.m. CST
by Prof. Pop-Cult
Here's an interesting tidbit from "Dark Horizons" that caught my attention: "Not far into the mission the Suliban, lead by a creature named 'Silik' who himself is taking orders from an unknown power in another time, attacks and kidnaps the Klingon - forcing the crew to find where they've taken him and why do they so desperately want him back in their clutches." Who could this "unknown power in another time" be? The Borg? Or, just maybe, this person/persons are Federation time-continuity cops from the 25th century. That would rock if this prequel has an arc tied to the Federation in a post-Voyager time period.
June 26, 2001, 3:21 p.m. CST
by Si Rowe
Drath-- I just thought that if the point is to continue the "pilot cameo" tradition of post-TOS Trek, then we really do want someone who's played the role before -- hence I'm happy to see Cromwell as Cochrane. (BTW, I think Glen Corbett [who played Cochrane in TOS' "Metamorphosis"] is dead, but don't quote me on that.) That said, I have nothing against "kisses to the past" such as meeting a younger T'Pau or Sarek -- but remember, we want the show to be able to stand on its own feet as well. If I have to choose between a show with compelling characters & storylines and an absolute commitment to past continuity, I'll take the good story any day. Of course, in an ideal world there's no conflict between those two, but this is not an ideal world...
June 26, 2001, 4:19 p.m. CST
Look at some of the early episodes. The time frame keeps bouncing around quite a bit (Nimoy was once quoted as saying that the show was set in the 22nd century, "The Squire of Gothos" indicates that the show takes place in the 27th century), there's constant alternation between having kitchen-style galleys and wall-mounted food replicators, and the Federation/Starfleet is even referred to as "Spacefleet" and "the United Earth Space Probe Agency." Even on the old show (which, combined with the first six movies and the cartoon series, represents the true STAR TREK for me--all the other incarnations suck), there were continuity errors, many of them glaring. That Berman's stinker in the making ENTERPRISE is going to suffer from those selfsame problems is no surprise to me. Heck, TNG went out its way to build up the Ferengi as murderous butchers who'd scare the hell out of a Klingon, and we ended up with harmless, Mxyzptlk-esque tricksters instead.
June 26, 2001, 6:21 p.m. CST
Yah, that would be the line. If you care so much about continuity that you need to bark about it, you have crossed the line. If you care so much about hating this series that you need to bark about it here, you have crossed the line. And most importantly, if you come in here and rant about better authors whilst spurting out names repeatedly as to appear somehow better, more sophisticated, or higher up on the sci-fi food chain, you have taken the line, rubbed your own fesces all over it, pissed across the line, then left your lifeless childhood cat on it. Don't get me wrong... I am an uber-geek, but I do understand the line. In the words of Joel from MST3K "... then repeat to yourself it's just a show, I should really just relax." Then again, this is all from someone who's bothered to read most of this babbling, so who am I to talk? YO JOE!
June 27, 2001, 1:01 a.m. CST
Okay, I am probably wrong on my info, but this question has been getting to me for a long time. I think I remember that Q introduced The Borg to Starfleet via showing The Borg to TNG Enterprise/Picard in TNG season 2 (1988-89) Now, as I occasionally watch Voyager, a question formed during one episode I was watching. In one Episode of ST: Voyager, we learn of how a young Seven (maybe 7 or 8 years old?) and her parents were studying the Borg, and eventually taken by them. However, in that episode, Seven's father is talking about how studying the Borg will let them show Starfleet that their theories on the Borg are correct (something like that). Here's my question. If Q showed Picard the Borg in 1988, why in the hell isn't Seven younger? Seven didnt even join Voyager until what, the fourth season? And that would be around 1997-98. So if Seven's family was studying the Borg for Starfleet, and Starfleet didn't know of the Borg until 1988, why in the hell does Seven look to be in her mid to late 20's when she is on Voyager no more than 10 years after she is taken by the Borg as a 7 or 8 year old? Did the people who make Voyager really expect us to believe that Seven is around 17 or 18 when she come on board Voyager? (I might even stretch so far as to say Seven was 10 when the Borg took here, but Seven doesn't even look to be as young as 20 when she first comes on Voyager.) I know I am being really picky here guys, but blame the people who make the Highlander Movies. After those flicks, I am constantly criticizing people for possible timeline screw ups :). (And by the way, excuse me for using real life dates such as 1988, I didnt feel like looking up stardate 38483.23 and such for all you diehards out there:) )
June 27, 2001, 4:25 a.m. CST
Berman and his people are determined to continue raping this dead horse for as long as they can. Of course they are going to try and write Trek history in their own image. I wish some of the people associated with Treks past like Shatner, Takei, Nimoy, Gene's wife Majel, Nicholas Meyer, Harve Bennet and others who love Star Trek and know how to really tell good stories would come together and take the franchise back and away from Berman and his people. I might watch the first episode of this just because...but wow, this series really should not be happening. There's a whole lot that shouldn't have happened since Gene's death. How many times has he rolled in his grave by now?
June 27, 2001, 7:13 a.m. CST
So when was it that Khan first reared his ugly head? Wasn't that about this same time line?
June 27, 2001, 1:41 p.m. CST
There are far too many generalisations in many of these posts. Some people appear to be blaming Berman and Braga for everything that has ever gone wrong with Trek. For one thing, Enterprise is the first of the star trek series that Braga has created and he has only worked as exec on voyager for the last couple of years and it was already pretty shite by that point. Also, neither Berman or Braga were that involved season seven of voyager as they were busy prepping Enterprise. Berman has been in charge of trek for a long time and some bad tv has come out during that time ( see Voyager) but forget all the good moments which we never would have had without Mr Berman. Nobody has seen the new series and we don't know all the facts so lets not dismiss it until after we've got some evidense.
June 28, 2001, 8:32 a.m. CST
For me at least, its the only logical conclusion. Do you really think that they poured over 35+ years over ST lore to make sure every i is dotted and every t is crossed? I can only imaging the number of novels that are out there, a face it a good portion of them are the authors little head trips anyway. I'll admit that I am a casual ST fan, I've read a few of the novels and I'd watch the series regardless, but face it, the average viewer won't notice, believe me. I mean face it, real life is not as detailed as some of this star trek stuff. If you want detailed chronologies, open a history book and take it from there. And always remember, folks are fallible. I'm sure you've written term papers which you felt have been done to the best of your abilities only to have it trashed by your teacher.Why must folks be so inclined to jump on others? Remember this is entertainment. Say it to yourself, now repeat until this sinks in.
June 28, 2001, 2:33 p.m. CST
You mean the series isn
June 29, 2001, 8:03 a.m. CST
Come on, with 5 series, 10 movies, an animated series and god knows how many million books, there is no way that continuity is going to be perfect. Hell, in Shatner's sequel to Gerneartions, you have to go through a whole series of things to become Borg instead of getting stuck in the neck. So get over it, move out of your parents basement, get yourself a girlfirend and stop worrying over the fact that some continuity point is off by 10 minutes. Get a life. PS- Glenn Corbett, the original Cochrane died in 1993 so unless you have a shovel, he can't reappear as Cochrane
- So The MAN OF STEEL Sequel Has (At Least) A Third Superhero In It... -- 643 total posts 102 posts
- Joe Dante's Making A New Movie Called BURYING THE EX And You Can Be A Part Of It! -- 43 total posts 38 posts
- Beatles' manager Brian Epstein to get his own flick, entitled THE FIFTH BEATLE! -- 56 total posts 29 posts
- WARCRAFT is getting its cast together! Adds Ben Foster, Dominic Cooper, Toby Kebbell, and more! -- 64 total posts 21 posts
- More Angry Volcano Action in this New Trailer for Pompeii! -- 64 total posts 19 posts
- A New 300: RISE OF AN EMPIRE Trailer Brings The Xerxes!! -- 68 total posts 16 posts
- SNL Christmas!! Titties And Dragons On SOUTH PARK!! Tyson Entrée On Antepenultimate SURVIVOR!! HOARDING Finale!! New BURNING LOVE, GIRL CODE, MODERN, MIDDLE, AHS, X, SOUP, PICKERS!! Herc’s Wednesday TV Talkback!! -- 46 total posts 15 posts
- Fan Of The 2010 Paul Bettany Angry Angel Movie LEGION?? Syfy Just Ordered To Series The TV Version!! -- 18 total posts 14 posts
- More pics of zombied-out Aubrey Plaza in LIFE AFTER BETH! -- 49 total posts 14 posts
- Rinko Kikuchi looks for the buried loot from FARGO in KUMIKO, THE TREASURE HUNTER (based on a true story)! -- 26 total posts 13 posts