STARTREK Enterprise - is it part of the shows history?

Otter

Who feels it's realy a TOS replacement?

Defiant · **Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:08 pm**

Not at all. Just trying to do something new, shake things up, etc.

Otter · **Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:22 pm But Considering**

it's set in a pre Kirk time why then is it more advanced?

The_Sisko · **Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:43 pm**

it's because the people that make enterprise dont actually know anything aboyut startrek. It is something completely different. You see on enterprise documentarys that the people that make enterprise have only been startrek fans for 3 years, and that is jhow long enterprise has been around for.
So all in all this is a completely new kind of trek as if it is being reborne. the only one that actually has some trek knoledge that makes the show is Roxanne Dawson (B'lanna Torres) and she has directed only a few episodes. Thats is why it is SO inaccurate cuz they dont know what there talking about basically.

robbiewebster · **Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:24 pm**

You people are stupid, Enterprise does not have superior technology, we do. They have so many limitations that Kirk's ship did not have. Its the same thing as when Star Wars Episode I came out. Stupid people said that the superior technology didn't make sense. Think about it, in that movie the ships were part of a royal armada. In the trilogy the ships were part of a rebellion in which anything that could get the job done was used. The ships didn't look beat up because of their inferior technology. I am so sick of people talking crap about this series. It has high quality everything (actors, special effects, storylines, etc.).

Sonic74205 · **Thu Oct 14, 2004 4:12 am**

No it's is a good show but it is just SO inaccurate to startrek

The 22nd century didn't have particle weapons but of look the enterprise has them. you see in quite a few epiosdes of the other series and they mention what thinngs were like in the past and it wasn't like that.

yes it has great effects
yes it has good actors
yes it does have some good story lines
...
But it's flaw is it's inacuracy. People are now becomiung confused because they dont know whether to believe with what TNG DS9 & VOYAGER says about the past or they could listen to what they go on about in enterprise causing people to not know what to believe causing arguments and differents of opinion between startrek fans

Otter · **Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:01 pm Well all that I can say is that alien ship seem**

just as advanced in the past has they are in the future.
and the Enterprise - NX Class Starship is apart from having a grappling huck instead of a tractor beam is much better than it should be.

robbiewebster · **Thu Oct 14, 2004 9:59 pm**

whatever, just enjoy the show, im sick of people complaining about it

Lord Borg · **Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:36 am**

watch the show, enjoy it!!

ps its been said that some tech change is becuase of first contact.

pss mybe the romulan war screwed things up?

psss remember the tos was made in the 60's!!!

The_Sisko · **Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:20 am**

Yes we all know about the temporal side of it which all comes down to Q
But because of what happened with Q and what happened with first contact then the past changed meaning that the future changed meaning that all of the other startrek is in a different reality so everything we have seen never actually happened.

stupid temoral mechanics!

Otter · **Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:37 am I've watched Startrek since day one.**

and unlike robbi I'm not stupid. Enterprise is like all of the other spinoff's a well made show in that it follows the well-trodden path that makes Startrek so good. However it still seems that in order to get more younger fans interested in the ongoing trilogy, Paramount have started using 24th cetury tech to do so.

I love STAR TREK and always WILL.

robbiewebster · **Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:03 pm**

ok, you're right i'm stupid. i'm sorry that i wasn't born in time to see TOS when it originally aired. that doesn't mean that i don't like it as much as you and for the same reasons. i grew up on TOS tapes and TNG being of fox every night at seven. i don't like star trek because i was drawn to the special effects, i like it because of the imagination. all i was saying is that i wan't people to stop saying that this show is a bad show for any reason. at least its not full of a bunch of girls dressing slutty and all the other stupid crap that seems to be unavoidable when watching any other show on television.

once again my apologies dousche-a-ma-bag

Otter · **Sat Oct 23, 2004 6:25 am**

Nate Jameson · **Sat Oct 23, 2004 10:19 am**

I don't think that it is intended to be a replacement. The storylines are too different, and they are in different times with different ships, and different characters.

WeAz · **Sat Oct 23, 2004 12:38 pm**

Superman · Fleet Admiral Joined: 06 Dec 2003 Posts: 10220

The problem is that, when TOS was being produced, no-one said, "Oh, we're going to make a prequel in 24 years time." No-one envisioned anything like that.

TOS and ENT are from two different eras. TOS was a show that could be enjoyed on so many levels and was very campy, like most 60's shows. ENT is a modern show, reflecting the 21st century world. It is a world away from Roddenberry's vision but that's just the way things are.

If the producers of ENT had tried to make the show less advanced-looking that TOS, it would look silly today.

I do respect Trek history but I think with any prequel, you just have to make small allowances and try to enjoy the show. I think the producers should respect the timeline and Trek continuity but not at the expense of good stories.

robbiewebster · **Sat Oct 23, 2004 10:17 pm**

PrankishSmart · **Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:24 am**

The writers of star trek enterprise are not the same writers of star trek original. Thats why we get the 24th century like technology, the upsidedown akira class etc.

Otter · **Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:53 am**

Starfleet Dentist & robbie, Sounds Good to me!

Superman · Fleet Admiral Joined: 06 Dec 2003 Posts: 10220

Nate Jameson · **Sun Oct 24, 2004 11:26 am**

You are right- there is bound to be a whole slew of opinions. But, I would say a majority of Trek fans like it.

robbiewebster · **Sun Oct 24, 2004 10:18 pm**

you're right

Ryano · **Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:05 am**

I think that the creators , directors and investors have tried to make a series that is more broadly accepted than previous series . I feel that maybe they have tried to take a leaf out of SG1's book in making a series that everyone will watch , focussing less on the timeline and technology and more on action , character interaction and special effects. Previous series may have been predominantly watched by viewers who were already Trek fans.
I should point out that this is of course just my opinion .... I'd hate to get on Robbie's bad side !

j\k

robbiewebster · **Tue Oct 26, 2004 9:55 pm**

lol^