Home The Bridge

Why does DB hate Jonathan Archer?

S31S31 ✭✭✭✭✭
Jonathan Archer is the first interstellar captain, founder of the COP and the most responsible guy for even creating UFP.

Yet DB obviously hates him. He wasn't used in events even when the event is an Andorian-Vulcan war, the event he literally stopped.

And what were the purpose of EV Suit Archer and North Star Archer if they aren't used in any events?
«13456

Comments

  • Grant77Grant77 ✭✭✭✭
    I understand why they're contractually obligated to advertise Star Trek Discovery. What I don't understand is why they would create an event like this, a conflict between Enterprise-era Andorians and Vulcans, and cram a bunch of Discovery characters into it while ignoring relevant ones.

    Couldn't they have just decided on a more Discovery-centric event? This feels like a slap in the face.

    It is an international slap in the face and not the first one. Of that, I have no doubt. I'm fed up with their egregious and antagonistic crew selection, as well as the misleading events and event titles. It is not acceptable.
  • MbannarMbannar ✭✭✭
    edited February 2018
    Wonder if its a sells issue, maybe they didnt sell alot of him in packs last couple of times, or his event didnt make as much as some of the others with different charchaters?

    Would the main reason i could think for him not to be around as must

    Janeway-5000
    Picard-5000
    Burnham-5000
    Archer-2000

    Then db would probly hammer down more on the money makers

    Not saying this is the case just a thought
  • Pallidyne wrote: »
    Let's just say Captain Archer doesn't fit Hollywood's preferred and now required demographic. I guess neither does the majority of the fan base for Star Trek. Interesting isn't it?

    Kinda back door of saying something that could be considered offensive, but I will counter it just as obtusely. The Star Trek Fanbase has always been diverse across several areas of demographics mostly due to its record of fairly diverse casting.

    And to put it even less obtusely. Doctor Martin Luther King Jr was aware of and saw the importance of Star Trek, some accounts even have him watching it.

    MLK being aware of, or watching, Star Trek is a fan myth that has been debunked many times. He was a little too busy dealing with civil rights issues to sit down and watch a fringe sci-fi show with low ratings. The myth of course is perpetuated by Nichelle Nichols and her ever changing account of meeting MLK.
  • Jim SteeleJim Steele ✭✭✭✭✭
    Jonathan Archer is the first interstellar captain, founder of the COP and the most responsible guy for even creating UFP.
    As a series, it was pretty underwhelming. There's your answer.

    Jim

    DB: Do Better
  • Archer's problem was that he was the Captain who went down with the franchise.

    And that gazelle speech. After VOY's 'Threshold' I always wondered if Trek could get any worse, and ENT answered that with a definitive yes with the gazelle speech.

    It's a shame, as he was a lot better at being Captain than Janeway. Cannot quite imagine Archer risking his ship so he could keep scratching an itch for holographic Oirish sexy times.

    And yet we have so many Janeways.
  • S31S31 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Mbannar wrote: »
    Wonder if its a sells issue, maybe they didnt sell alot of him in packs last couple of times, or his event didnt make as much as some of the others with different charchaters?

    Would the main reason i could think for him not to be around as must

    Janeway-5000
    Picard-5000
    Burnham-5000
    Archer-2000

    Then db would probly hammer down more on the money makers

    Not saying this is the case just a thought

    There is a different question there - why would anyone buy Archer's pack when he is never used in events.
  • PallidynePallidyne ✭✭✭✭✭
    Pallidyne wrote: »
    Let's just say Captain Archer doesn't fit Hollywood's preferred and now required demographic. I guess neither does the majority of the fan base for Star Trek. Interesting isn't it?

    Kinda back door of saying something that could be considered offensive, but I will counter it just as obtusely. The Star Trek Fanbase has always been diverse across several areas of demographics mostly due to its record of fairly diverse casting.

    And to put it even less obtusely. Doctor Martin Luther King Jr was aware of and saw the importance of Star Trek, some accounts even have him watching it.

    MLK being aware of, or watching, Star Trek is a fan myth that has been debunked many times. He was a little too busy dealing with civil rights issues to sit down and watch a fringe sci-fi show with low ratings. The myth of course is perpetuated by Nichelle Nichols and her ever changing account of meeting MLK.

    I'm sorry but after the whole Dwight Schultz misinfo from you earlier, I need some citations.
  • IronagedaveIronagedave ✭✭✭✭✭
    Data1001 wrote: »
    People here complain about perceived (and some real) hatred against Discovery, but there is more against Enterprise; worse, the hatred against Enterprise comes from the top, not other players.

    People can like what they want, but it is hard to believe that DB does not hate Enterprise.

    TlaB6v5.gif

    lta19l9bakur.jpeg

    Don't talk to my friend in the background like that!
    [was on Sabbatical/Hiatus] Currently a trialist at Galaxy SquadronSTAY SAFE and KBO
  • PallidynePallidyne ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2018
    And here I just thought Shran liked American Football (Pigskin, lol)
  • Pallidyne wrote: »
    Pallidyne wrote: »
    Let's just say Captain Archer doesn't fit Hollywood's preferred and now required demographic. I guess neither does the majority of the fan base for Star Trek. Interesting isn't it?

    Kinda back door of saying something that could be considered offensive, but I will counter it just as obtusely. The Star Trek Fanbase has always been diverse across several areas of demographics mostly due to its record of fairly diverse casting.

    And to put it even less obtusely. Doctor Martin Luther King Jr was aware of and saw the importance of Star Trek, some accounts even have him watching it.

    MLK being aware of, or watching, Star Trek is a fan myth that has been debunked many times. He was a little too busy dealing with civil rights issues to sit down and watch a fringe sci-fi show with low ratings. The myth of course is perpetuated by Nichelle Nichols and her ever changing account of meeting MLK.

    I'm sorry but after the whole Dwight Schultz misinfo from you earlier, I need some citations.

    Agreed, Pallidyne.
    https://theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2016/oct/18/star-trek-nichelle-nichols-martin-luther-king-trekker

    "In her autobiography, Nichelle Nichols writes that he (MLK) told her she couldn’t leave because she was a role model for millions of young girls and women – the only African-American on TV in a role worth having."
  • Pallidyne wrote: »
    Pallidyne wrote: »
    Let's just say Captain Archer doesn't fit Hollywood's preferred and now required demographic. I guess neither does the majority of the fan base for Star Trek. Interesting isn't it?

    Kinda back door of saying something that could be considered offensive, but I will counter it just as obtusely. The Star Trek Fanbase has always been diverse across several areas of demographics mostly due to its record of fairly diverse casting.

    And to put it even less obtusely. Doctor Martin Luther King Jr was aware of and saw the importance of Star Trek, some accounts even have him watching it.

    MLK being aware of, or watching, Star Trek is a fan myth that has been debunked many times. He was a little too busy dealing with civil rights issues to sit down and watch a fringe sci-fi show with low ratings. The myth of course is perpetuated by Nichelle Nichols and her ever changing account of meeting MLK.

    I'm sorry but after the whole Dwight Schultz misinfo from you earlier, I need some citations.

    I'm sorry but I don't provide misinformation. I stated, quite clearly, that I recalled reading, around the time that Dirk Benedict went on a misogynistic rant about RDM's recasting Starbuck, that there had been reports that the set of the original A-Team was a boys club. If you re-read that thread I believe another poster stated Schultz's misogyny was a matter of public record.

    As for Nichelle Nichols' ever changing spin on MLK... feel free to read up on it yourself. There's plenty out there.
  • PallidynePallidyne ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2018
    Pallidyne wrote: »
    Pallidyne wrote: »
    Let's just say Captain Archer doesn't fit Hollywood's preferred and now required demographic. I guess neither does the majority of the fan base for Star Trek. Interesting isn't it?

    Kinda back door of saying something that could be considered offensive, but I will counter it just as obtusely. The Star Trek Fanbase has always been diverse across several areas of demographics mostly due to its record of fairly diverse casting.

    And to put it even less obtusely. Doctor Martin Luther King Jr was aware of and saw the importance of Star Trek, some accounts even have him watching it.

    MLK being aware of, or watching, Star Trek is a fan myth that has been debunked many times. He was a little too busy dealing with civil rights issues to sit down and watch a fringe sci-fi show with low ratings. The myth of course is perpetuated by Nichelle Nichols and her ever changing account of meeting MLK.

    I'm sorry but after the whole Dwight Schultz misinfo from you earlier, I need some citations.

    I'm sorry but I don't provide misinformation. I stated, quite clearly, that I recalled reading, around the time that Dirk Benedict went on a misogynistic rant about RDM's recasting Starbuck, that there had been reports that the set of the original A-Team was a boys club. If you re-read that thread I believe another poster stated Schultz's misogyny was a matter of public record.

    As for Nichelle Nichols' ever changing spin on MLK... feel free to read up on it yourself. There's plenty out there.

    I've still yet to find anything on the A-Team pieces except allegations against George Peppard. That is with several hours of research as well, as well as written interviews with former female lead on the A-Team as well as several guest stars, in TV Guide, Entertainment Weekly and other magazines. She did complain that Mr. T was also a camera hog however.

    Benedict apparently didn't lose his head til the Galactica reboot and he was pissed someone got 'his role'. He had some interesting things to say about Bradley Cooper as well.
  • While Enterprise is no where near a favorite for me, I like Archer as a captain and he should be used more in the game. The guy had a key role in the Federation and Starfleet
  • SiblinSiblin ✭✭✭
    They ain’t the only ones. I Disliked most of ENT and archer was fairly dull. Perhaps it’s an American vs European thing, for the Americans he’s an exploring pioneer, but to Europeans he doesn’t offer much.

    What did Europeans get? A fussy Brit in the form of reed :/
  • Grant77Grant77 ✭✭✭✭
    Siblin wrote: »
    They ain’t the only ones. I Disliked most of ENT and archer was fairly dull. Perhaps it’s an American vs European thing, for the Americans he’s an exploring pioneer, but to Europeans he doesn’t offer much.

    What did Europeans get? A fussy Brit in the form of reed :/

    Although not as popular as Kirk and Picard, I think it's fair to say that we could at least have Archer in an event a single time in over two years of events. I don't complain when some of the much worse characters like Kim and Stamets are used in events.
  • (HGH)Apollo(HGH)Apollo ✭✭✭✭✭
    There should be an Archer in an event since he was a captain. Maybe DB could put him in or tell us why they cant. Archer was only an okay captain at best. I was hugely disappointed in his performance. He was so great in Quantum Leap and so poor in Enterprise, espeecially season 1. But he was a captain so should be in an event, especially for those that would like to get him.
    Let’s fly!
  • Pallidyne wrote: »
    Let's just say Captain Archer doesn't fit Hollywood's preferred and now required demographic. I guess neither does the majority of the fan base for Star Trek. Interesting isn't it?

    Kinda back door of saying something that could be considered offensive, but I will counter it just as obtusely. The Star Trek Fanbase has always been diverse across several areas of demographics mostly due to its record of fairly diverse casting.

    And to put it even less obtusely. Doctor Martin Luther King Jr was aware of and saw the importance of Star Trek, some accounts even have him watching it.

    I am not sure what was offensive about that. Was it stating Hollywood's clear preferences or is it simply offensive now to be a part of a certain demographic and *have* an opinion? Which part was offensive to you?
  • PallidynePallidyne ✭✭✭✭✭
    Pallidyne wrote: »
    Let's just say Captain Archer doesn't fit Hollywood's preferred and now required demographic. I guess neither does the majority of the fan base for Star Trek. Interesting isn't it?

    Kinda back door of saying something that could be considered offensive, but I will counter it just as obtusely. The Star Trek Fanbase has always been diverse across several areas of demographics mostly due to its record of fairly diverse casting.

    And to put it even less obtusely. Doctor Martin Luther King Jr was aware of and saw the importance of Star Trek, some accounts even have him watching it.

    I am not sure what was offensive about that. Was it stating Hollywood's clear preferences or is it simply offensive now to be a part of a certain demographic and *have* an opinion? Which part was offensive to you?

    Lol, if you really don't find it easy to find, you're in a mental demographic that probably promotes that kind of offensive thought.
  • If the absence of Archer is due to some sort of ongoing approvals issue, it would behoove DB to tell us as much - like when they had to pull Charlie Evans from what was supposed to be his event at the very last second because it turned out they didn't get the necessary permissions from that actor's estate that they thought they had locked down.

    The fact that we now have more Burnhams in the game than we do Archers, and that she's been an event character repeatedly to the point where DB is making people sick of her already, after the show's been around for less than a year, seems almost counter-productive.

    Hell, we have approved Archer art that dates back to the beta and has been used in-game repeatedly that corresponds to no in-crew version of Archer. Seriously, what is the deal, DB?
Sign In or Register to comment.