The Expanse (ENT)

This forum is for discussing Chuck's videos as they are publicly released. And for bashing Neelix, but that's just repeating what I already said.
G-Man
Officer
Posts: 484
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 3:59 am

Re: The Expanse (ENT)

Post by G-Man »

One quibble. In the comparison to 9/11, Chuck mentioned the estimates of casualties rising over time.

Actually, the estimates for the number of people killed in 9/11 started out fairly high (around 10,000 if I recall) and progressively got lower until they settled on just under 3000 (not including people who died from aftereffects years later).
"You say I'm a dreamer/we're two of a kind/looking for some perfect world/we know we'll never find" - Thompson Twins
User avatar
Redem
Officer
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: The Expanse (ENT)

Post by Redem »

Megabob452 wrote:
Redem wrote:This video made me realise that whenever we talk about Archer I keep thinking of the cartoon

A better choice for captain?
This has tempted me on more than one occasion to write a fanfic with the Enterprise cast replaced by the Archer cast. Sterling as captain, Lana as first officer, Cheryl at comms, Kreiger as chief engineer and/or medical officer, et cetera. I just wish I was better at writing comedy to pull this off.
Now I just want to see Krieger reaction to being pregnant
User avatar
Admiral X
Captain
Posts: 2654
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 4:37 am

Re: The Expanse (ENT)

Post by Admiral X »

Honestly it was all up to the writing. Part of that is that the actor couldn't do loud angry very well. The rest is just a complete failure of the basics of writing (having everyone go on about how awesome a character is only for the character to fail to live up to that description), and a lack of understanding of what leadership looks like ("the captain is always right").
"Black care rarely sits behind a rider whose pace is fast enough."
-TR
User avatar
Wargriffin
Captain
Posts: 579
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 9:17 pm

Re: The Expanse (ENT)

Post by Wargriffin »

You always gotta love when Chuck is in one of his love/hate spills about Braga
"When you rule by fear, your greatest weakness is the one who's no longer afraid."
User avatar
Rocketboy1313
Captain
Posts: 1127
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 6:17 pm

Re: The Expanse (ENT)

Post by Rocketboy1313 »

The writing for Enterprise is bad. But I don't feel that people bemoan the basic story enough.

A prequel will always be pointless and they didn't even do a prequel well.

If you want to show the early days of the Federation, here's an idea, focus on the people who make up the Federation. There was no need for new races (Xindi) or to bring in the opponents of the Original series (Klingons and Romulans). The entire first season could have been about establishing a colony on a nearby star, getting to know the dynamic between Earth and Vulcan and hinting at some nebulous threat.
Second season is meeting the Andorians and Tellerites, HAVE EVERYONE FIGHT EACH OTHER, and then reveal some other power at work, Future Guy, Humans who want to conquer and control instead of peacefully co-exist, whatever.
Season 3 could be entirely about uniting the 4 original founding societies of the Federation following the war and moving forward peacefully to explore the universe with political intrigue and dealing with Breen, Orion, and Nasicans manipulated by Future Guy or the previously mentioned nebulous threat.
Season 4 pick 5 things about Star Trek that are iconic (Transporters, the Prime Directive, Cheesy space monsters, whatever) and run 3-5 mini-series focused on each of those things, "Why does the Prime Directive exist?" "Because we got bogged down in a war for 6 months, it cost a fortune and accomplished nothing." Boom.
Season 5 defeat the nebulous threat/Future Guy with help from 3 new inductees to the Federation, Betazoids, Trill, and Boleans. At this point you now have built the Federation we know and love and illustrated each step with fun action.

I now realize I am describing about 60% of "Babylon 5".

We have seen the Federation fight Klingons, we haven't seen them fight each other and what we did see of it in Enterprise was thin and weak. Think of how many wars have been fought by the countries that now make up the EU. How many millions died in just the last hundred years. And we are supposed to think that the Federation is made up of a bunch of disparate worlds that had the equivalent of a tickle fight before fighting someone else? Boo!
My Blog: http://rocketboy1313.blogspot.com/
My Twitter: https://twitter.com/Rocketboy1313
My Tumblr: https://www.tumblr.com/blog/rocketboy1313
My Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/13rocketboy13
User avatar
Durandal_1707
Captain
Posts: 766
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 1:24 am

Re: The Expanse (ENT)

Post by Durandal_1707 »

Rocketboy1313 wrote:A prequel will always be pointless
Why do you say that? There are plenty of examples of prequels that are far from pointless. The Godfather, Part II is one of the best films ever made, and half of it is a prequel. Casino Royale is another prequel that was very well received, as was Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Babylon 5: In the Beginning was one of the best installments of that series, and if you want to expand into video games, Lufia II was a prequel which was much better than its original. Even Enterprise was pretty enjoyable in its fourth season, where it was actually being a prequel instead of just being Voyager with phase pistols instead of phasers.

Enterprise could have been the best of all of them if they'd done it right.
ChiggyvonRichthofen
Captain
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 2:40 am

Re: The Expanse (ENT)

Post by ChiggyvonRichthofen »

I think a prequel could have been good, but they never took advantage of the premise. There's never truly a sense of newness because they're using all the same conceits and tropes. They even have transporters whenever they need them. Other technology is different in name only. Archer has the same values as any other Starfleet captain (and he's even more smug about it). The first couple of seasons doing planet of the week stories, it's just exactly the wrong thing.

It's like making a show about pioneers and giving the heroes cars and cellphones. The time traveling plot goes even further in undermining the advantages of doing a prequel.
The owls are not what they seem.
User avatar
PerrySimm
Captain
Posts: 689
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 2:37 am

Re: The Expanse (ENT)

Post by PerrySimm »

Enterprise gave up everything including the Star Trek name, but The Expanse at least returned Star Trek to a tradition of commenting on modern society.
Durandal_1707 wrote:
Rocketboy1313 wrote:A prequel will always be pointless
Why do you say that? There are plenty of examples of prequels that are far from pointless.
Enterprise shouldn't be compared with Temple of Doom - the relevant prequel is (the disappointing) Young Indiana Jones Chronicles. There is a serious difficulty doing episodic television in a setting with hard limits on your narrative freedom. Sometimes you can get around it by being a comedy, like M*A*S*H. But if you're stuck with a drama, canon (or in Indy's case, actual world history) makes it a tough job. One that the Voyager writer's room was not up to.

Just to remind, The Expanse brings us to the Xindi. A major enemy we never heard of. CANON ALERT!

Okay, fine. There's 150 Federation worlds, there's a few we haven't met, right? Presumably there's a fair number of isolationist aliens out there that keep a thin profile. Maybe the Xindi would have been just another reclusive single-system species if it hadn't been for temporal intervention.

I didn't like Season 3, but I acknowledge the effort. They fixed the dullness problem with the show. They forced Archer to play Scruples, rather than pontificate. The new scenario added badly needed complexity to Tucker and gave Reed something more to do than brood. But this season didn't do much for Mayweather and didn't seem to break Sato in the way it should have.
UGxlYXNlIHByb3ZpZGUgeW91ciBjaGFsbGVuZ2UgcmVzcG9uc2UgZm9yIFJFRCA5NC4K
ScreamingDoom
Officer
Posts: 115
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:18 pm

Re: The Expanse (ENT)

Post by ScreamingDoom »

Megabob452 wrote:
Redem wrote:This video made me realise that whenever we talk about Archer I keep thinking of the cartoon

A better choice for captain?
This has tempted me on more than one occasion to write a fanfic with the Enterprise cast replaced by the Archer cast. Sterling as captain, Lana as first officer, Cheryl at comms, Kreiger as chief engineer and/or medical officer, et cetera. I just wish I was better at writing comedy to pull this off.

Do you want Klingons? Because that's how you get Klingons.
User avatar
Durandal_1707
Captain
Posts: 766
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 1:24 am

Re: The Expanse (ENT)

Post by Durandal_1707 »

PerrySimm wrote:
Durandal_1707 wrote:
Rocketboy1313 wrote:A prequel will always be pointless
Why do you say that? There are plenty of examples of prequels that are far from pointless.
Enterprise shouldn't be compared with Temple of Doom - the relevant prequel is (the disappointing) Young Indiana Jones Chronicles. There is a serious difficulty doing episodic television in a setting with hard limits on your narrative freedom. Sometimes you can get around it by being a comedy, like M*A*S*H. But if you're stuck with a drama, canon (or in Indy's case, actual world history) makes it a tough job. One that the Voyager writer's room was not up to.
I'm not comparing Enterprise to the Temple of Doom—I'm rebutting the statement that prequels are always bad by pointing out examples of prequels that were, in fact, quite good.
Just to remind, The Expanse brings us to the Xindi. A major enemy we never heard of. CANON ALERT!
OMG, this prequel to the popular American Civil War series, about the early years of the USA, has this one season bringing us to The Barbary Pirates, a major enemy we never heard of in the previously existing Civil War series or in either of the two World War spinoffs! CANON ALERT!

And don't even get me started on that other "Roman Empire" prequel series that kept pulling all kinds of enemies out of its ass—"Huns", "Carthaginians", "Visigoths"—why didn't any of them ever show up before?
Post Reply