Sfdebris.net

Chuck's idea for a rebooted Enterprise sounds very much like ''The Motion Picture done well'' in my opinion. Seriously; replace Admiral Archer with Admiral Kirk, Archer's injury with Kirk's burgeoning mid-life crisis, Captain Hernandez with Captain Decker, the NX-02/NX-01 Refit with the 1701-Refit, and V'ger with whatever big bad that we would have had, then you would have the exact same show.

And what makes this doubly ironic is that in Chuck's review for the Motion Picture he has a mock conversation between Kirk and I'lea at Archer's expense:
I'Lea Bot: ''And what of the ship commanded by Archer?''
Kirk: ''He's dead to us.''

What I also found interesting is that in one of Chuck's other Enterprise reviews, he said that he would have ended the Temporal Cold War by having the Enterprise and Archer heroically erased from existence whilst trying to save the galaxy, using this quote from Babylon 5 as a justification: ''Then you make the sacrifice willingly? No fame. No armies or banners or cities to celebrate your name. You will die alone and unremarked and forgotten.''

The thing is that the reboot of Enterprise and this end to the Temporal Cold War could mesh brilliantly. Think of it this way: What if the enemy that gave Archer the walking cane was Future Guy? Not only have you tied up half a dozen lose ends, but suddenly you now have an unintended story arc that stretches from Broken Bow all the way to here. The story potential here is endless, and it would have beautifully fixed every overall series continuity error that this show ever had because it would have ended with the entire timeline being erased from existence and replaced with the one from the Original Series.

Definitely agree that "Cold Station 12" was the best realized and "Borderland" was the weaker of the three. There's a bit of a gap, but if you counted "Affliction" and "Divergence" this could be thought of as a five-episode arc.

Like the Riker-swap concept, we're presented with another alternative fiction pitch that compels the interest. Yet unlike the missed opportunity of "Second Chances", the Admiral Archer scenario would have direct impact on casting, in addition to the shakeup in character dynamics.

As much as it would have been darker and edgier (and as such, très 2004) to explore the personal journey of one broken officer, would the studio or network see a shakeup in the lead role as marketable? Would Bakula have given away top billing to keep the show alive? Doubtless, there would be endless 'Sinclair vs. Sheridan'-style debates!

PerrySimm wrote: ↑Sat Jun 30, 2018 11:25 pm Definitely agree that "Cold Station 12" was the best realized and "Borderland" was the weaker of the three. There's a bit of a gap, but if you counted "Affliction" and "Divergence" this could be thought of as a five-episode arc.

Like the Riker-swap concept, we're presented with another alternative fiction pitch that compels the interest. Yet unlike the missed opportunity of "Second Chances", the Admiral Archer scenario would have direct impact on casting, in addition to the shakeup in character dynamics.

As much as it would have been darker and edgier (and as such, très 2004) to explore the personal journey of one broken officer, would the studio or network see a shakeup in the lead role as marketable? Would Bakula have given away top billing to keep the show alive? Doubtless, there would be endless 'Sinclair vs. Sheridan'-style debates!

In my version, Bakula would be ''almost'' as prominent as he always was. Think General O'Neill in season 8 of SG-1.

I dunno, I'm a sucker for Time Travelling Alien Space Nazis. In fact, if STD wanted to hook me in then a proper cheese fest with Space Nazis and lots of 'Allo 'Allo-ing might just make me a viewer. I'm one on those irritating Trek fans who love the show as much FOR the camp as despite it.

Has anyone ever done a Myriad Universes story about the Soong Augments occupying the Bak'u?

Can someone explain to me the joke about the Emmy awards? I feel kind of stupid not understanding it...

Scott Bakula, who plays Archer, previously starred in the TV show Quantum Leap, where he was nominated for the Best Actor award at the Emmys multiple times. The joke is contrasting that with Archer's comically bad acting while trying to bluff the Klingons.

I got that part, I didn't get the bit after that - saying who he was acting worse than?

Now that this trilogy of episodes is over, what I'd like to say about it is:

1. It wasn't season 1, 2 or 3 that gave us T'Pol being treated like literal property, it was the "good" season.

2. I agree with SFdebirs, this would have made far, FAR batter start then Time Traveling Space NAZI's

3. I grew up with reruns of Quantum Leap... how do you get worse as an actor... how?

4. Soong is.... too much? too good? far too good? I dunno, Brent Spiner gives a bit too good of a performance for this show.

5. The android part at the end... is a nice nod to continuity... but I have to agree once more with our gracious host, it makes no sense. Then again, this is Enterprise, time traveling space nazi's are a staple of the show, while space nazi's are a staple of the series as a whole.

All in all, a good start, but I really can't agree with most people that praise this little trilogy of episodes. They're good, but not praiseworthy.

With Alex Newman playing the main augment, I was half-expecting a line about Dune or him being the Kwisatz Haderach.