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.
"Promotes that kind of offensive thought" what an interesting statement. People like you are the reason western societies are giving up free speech as to "not offend". I'll try to keep my offensive thought rays directed away from you so you don't burst into offensive flames or cry oceans of liberal tears because I think differently from you. Freedom in America doesn't end where your delicate feelings begin.
Sounds like you're 'offended' because someone pointed out that Star Trek traditionally focuses on diversity. Try not to get bent outta shape when people point that out. It makes you look like a precious conservative snowflake.
I am only offended that our western culture is so concerned with "being offensive" that freedom of speech is forfeited to preserve feelings. I know liberals find other people's freedom of speech offensive but when you leave your campus one day and enter the real world you will not have "safe spaces" to hide your delicate feelings. I am not the snowflake here. I presented an argument and was told that I promoted "offensive thoughts". Not everyone is your gender studies professor that only allows for things you want to hear.
Same goes for you. If you want all out war with no rules don't be upset if you actually get it. Things like false accusations will fall under your "free speech" philosophy, and people airing silly opinions like "the victim must be trusted and the accused must be punished" without any rules attached (like due procedure and evidence) will be a consequence of no rules.
Like it or not, polite and respectful debate are the signs of civilized behaviour.
DB goes by what they think sells. Enterprise is the least liked trek series. It nearly killed the franchise. It had some good points but it also had a lot of bad ones. The end was so terrible. That being said, DB should have an Archer in an event or say why he hasnt been in an event as he was a captain. You cant say that DB has ignored other aspects of Enterprise as we have had two events with degra, we just got a couple shrans, and we have had other ent peeps. Remember that Enterprise only went for four seasons and was cancelled. People might say Discovery has too many characters and that a lot of people complain about Discovery, but it is the only running trek series and so must be well represented in order to bring in new people.
DB goes by what they think sells. Enterprise is the least liked trek series. It nearly killed the franchise. It had some good points but it also had a lot of bad ones. The end was so terrible. That being said, DB should have an Archer in an event or say why he hasnt been in an event as he was a captain. You cant say that DB has ignored other aspects of Enterprise as we have had two events with degra, we just got a couple shrans, and we have had other ent peeps. Remember that Enterprise only went for four seasons and was cancelled. People might say Discovery has too many characters and that a lot of people complain about Discovery, but it is the only running trek series and so must be well represented in order to bring in new people.
Voyager is the least liked trek series.
Actually in the "Which Series Do You Like Best" Polls that I've seen both here and other places, Voyager usually outpaces Enterprise by a factor of 2 to 1
For instance in the latest one here in the forums, the series were ranked as follows:
DS9 - 38%
TNG - 25%
TOS - 15%
Voy - 12%
ENT - 3%
DSC - 2%
TAS - 1%
There are many such polls out there in internetland and in very few does this order change much.
That is weird on reddit almost every thread has a load of people who say how Enterprise is underrated and that they fall in love with it second time they watched it and that Voyager is the worst Trek series.
Then you have a several youtube channel that says the same Anti-Trekker, Lore Reloaded etc.
Enterprise is vastly underrated. While I love DS9 and would vote for it as best, quite frankly the entire star trek universe would be vastly lessened by removing any one of those series. They all have something unique and special and I hate having to vote on things that I respect and admire and have given me so much to appreciate and enjoy.
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
A whole hell of a lot better than Discovery. Also, Enterprise is Star Trek, Discovery is more like a semi-high quality fan film; a sci-fi show with occasional Star Trek affectations.
Weirdly enough, I’m also Vulcan Housewife. Also, RNGesus hates me, like really, REALLY hates me.
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
A whole hell of a lot better than Discovery. Also, Enterprise is Star Trek, Discovery is more like a semi-high quality fan film; a sci-fi show with occasional Star Trek affectations.
Thx you gave me a hard laugh. „....semi high quality fan film“.
Its obvious you never watched Discovery at all.
Regarding the topic:
I don t mind a new Archer, as 2* threshold reward.
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
A whole hell of a lot better than Discovery. Also, Enterprise is Star Trek, Discovery is more like a semi-high quality fan film; a sci-fi show with occasional Star Trek affectations.
Thx you gave me a hard laugh. „....semi high quality fan film“.
Its obvious you never watched Discovery at all.
Regarding the topic:
I don t mind a new Archer, as 2* threshold reward.
Glad I could help. I’ve watched all of Enterprise and I’ve watched the entire first season of Discovery as well. I stand by my earlier statement. Please don’t misunderstand; I don’t hate Disco, I just don’t think it’s good enough, yet, to be called Star Trek. Close, especially near the end, but not yet, but then again, TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise all had rough first seasons. As usual, hindsight will be 20/20.
Weirdly enough, I’m also Vulcan Housewife. Also, RNGesus hates me, like really, REALLY hates me.
So, I might have a minority opinion here, but I really dislike the mirror universe, especially in ds9. It is a great place to see dystopia, but way too many episodes focus on it.
So, I might have a minority opinion here, but I really dislike the mirror universe, especially in ds9. It is a great place to see dystopia, but way too many episodes focus on it.
I liked it in TOS and ENT, but I agree it got to be a little much in DS9. I view those episodes as more "entertaining fluff" than anything else. There were some parts I liked, but Mirror Kira always made me cringe.
“Treason, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.” - Elim Garak
Cardassian wishlist: Tora Ziyal - Thanks!
Natima Lang
Empok Nor Garak
Tekeny Ghemor
Mira
Makbar
Dejar
Ulani Belor
There are only 5 DS9 Mirror eps.
That's less than 3% of all DS9 eps.
Well, compared to 1 TOS and 2 ENT.
It's not so much the number of episodes though, as it is just that it felt as though they weren't really doing anything new or interesting in the Mirror Universe. I liked some parts (mainly Sisko and Smiley), but by the end it was just too much and unnecessary. I would have rathered another Ferengi episode or something.
“Treason, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.” - Elim Garak
Cardassian wishlist: Tora Ziyal - Thanks!
Natima Lang
Empok Nor Garak
Tekeny Ghemor
Mira
Makbar
Dejar
Ulani Belor
There are only 5 DS9 Mirror eps.
That's less than 3% of all DS9 eps.
Well, compared to 1 TOS and 2 ENT.
It's not so much the number of episodes though, as it is just that it felt as though they weren't really doing anything new or interesting in the Mirror Universe. I liked some parts (mainly Sisko and Smiley), but by the end it was just too much and unnecessary. I would have rathered another Ferengi episode or something.
Or 7 Discovery.
I get not liking them, it just really wasn't that much and could be easily skipped over.
I thought they showed progression in the eps, with the Jennifer arc, and with the whole resistance thing. The last ep, frankly wasn't so much a mirror ep as it was lets try to use the Mirror U as comic relief for the Ferengi, with the bright spot being Ezri.
Rom kinda blew the last ep for me as it was like watching Goofy in a Disney cartoon.
There are only 5 DS9 Mirror eps.
That's less than 3% of all DS9 eps.
Well, compared to 1 TOS and 2 ENT.
It's not so much the number of episodes though, as it is just that it felt as though they weren't really doing anything new or interesting in the Mirror Universe. I liked some parts (mainly Sisko and Smiley), but by the end it was just too much and unnecessary. I would have rathered another Ferengi episode or something.
Or 7 Discovery.
I get not liking them, it just really wasn't that much and could be easily skipped over.
I thought they showed progression in the eps, with the Jennifer arc, and with the whole resistance thing. The last ep, frankly wasn't so much a mirror ep as it was lets try to use the Mirror U as comic relief for the Ferengi, with the bright spot being Ezri.
Rom kinda blew the last ep for me as it was like watching Goofy in a Disney cartoon.
"Skippable" certainly is the word.
I will grant that they had a continuing plot, which helped. And it's possibly the last ep that sort of retroactively ruined it for me. It felt like they just ran out of ideas and were using the MU as a crutch.
The arc with Mirror Jennifer and Jake were pretty good, but ultimately felt "meh" by the end.
Disco Mirror stuff though was entirely unnecessary, ruined the character of Lorca and felt like a giant waste of time.
“Treason, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.” - Elim Garak
Cardassian wishlist: Tora Ziyal - Thanks!
Natima Lang
Empok Nor Garak
Tekeny Ghemor
Mira
Makbar
Dejar
Ulani Belor
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.
Stamets is an awesome character! You start off to believe he’s cold and rude, but he changes and your opinion of him changes.
One of the things discovery gets right is most of the characters have more than one dimension. As much as most of the other flavours were great, the characters were largely simplistic - “the logical one” or “the young ensign” etc..
If you think that Spock's only characterisation was "the logical one", I think you need to re-watch some things...
Also have you seen DS9? Literally no character there was one-dimensional. Even the Ferengi were complex.
And TNG had little to no cut-and-dried characters either. Picard was the strategic, brilliant diplomat and tactician, with loads of empathy, but he was also borderline afraid of children, developed PTSD about the Borg to the point of driving him to genocide and extreme measure, and he developed a level of understanding about the Klingons that few captains ever could hope for. Not to mention everything about the Vash arc.
I could go on about a lot of other characters, but long story short, DSC was in no way the first ST show to have "complex" characters, and having a character simply go from one thing to another isn't actually that complex compared to a lot of other characters developed in previous series.
Also, Stamets
changed because he was biologically fused with alien spores, that's not so much character development as straight-up "this is a new character now".
Thats actually not what happened. He is not fused with the spores he is fused with the Tardigrade DNA.
@the OP There are 6 Archers in the game. Thats plenty. Is the argument that we don’t have high enough stats? The game good use a "Captain Archer" and problem should have had one by now over some of the other variations.
Technically, you could probably consider every Discovery episode but the first two as Mirror episodes, since from the moment we meet Lorca we’re unwittingly involved in a Mirror plot and have met a Mirror Universe character.
Also, comparatively the number of Mirror episodes in DS9 were really small, and I rather liked them, though I kinda ended up hating the Intendant. She was awesome in the very first appearance but steadily became more and more cartoonish in her villainy. It was still fun to watch but actually ends up making me think of Doctor Chaotica, lol, in its hamishness (I’m not sure that’s a word but I’m using it as one.).
Weirdly enough, I’m also Vulcan Housewife. Also, RNGesus hates me, like really, REALLY hates me.
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.
Stamets is an awesome character! You start off to believe he’s cold and rude, but he changes and your opinion of him changes.
One of the things discovery gets right is most of the characters have more than one dimension. As much as most of the other flavours were great, the characters were largely simplistic - “the logical one” or “the young ensign” etc..
If you think that Spock's only characterisation was "the logical one", I think you need to re-watch some things...
Also have you seen DS9? Literally no character there was one-dimensional. Even the Ferengi were complex.
And TNG had little to no cut-and-dried characters either. Picard was the strategic, brilliant diplomat and tactician, with loads of empathy, but he was also borderline afraid of children, developed PTSD about the Borg to the point of driving him to genocide and extreme measure, and he developed a level of understanding about the Klingons that few captains ever could hope for. Not to mention everything about the Vash arc.
I could go on about a lot of other characters, but long story short, DSC was in no way the first ST show to have "complex" characters, and having a character simply go from one thing to another isn't actually that complex compared to a lot of other characters developed in previous series.
Also, Stamets
changed because he was biologically fused with alien spores, that's not so much character development as straight-up "this is a new character now".
yep DS9 might even be my favourite series prior to DSC, and agree the characters are relatively good. And i'm not saying there is nothing complex about these characters and your examples of spock and picard are decent ones (i was also thinking about data when referring to the logical one) and I acknowledge they are not completely one dimensional. But even so i get the impression that the concepts were ones of "heres the bridge crew and their core traits" and writing is one of, like, "what would happen if the logical one fell in love" etc, etc.
I'm not saying other series are terrible (i wouldn't be a fan if it was), just saying I believe (and I know not everyone will agree with me) that Discovery does this better than any of the predecessors. Mainly i was taking aim at ENT. I'm glad you mentioned DS9 and Picard, as Sisko, Picard (and Janeway to some extent) do have their layers and intriguing elements, but i never got that with Archer.
And i think you misunderstand what i'm saying about stamets - its not so much what happens to him that changes him, its that you understand him more too. Theres one scene (before the event you refer to) where burnham is helping him, and he cuts this sideways glance which is perfect, where you understand that he's not what you first expect. His curmudgeonly personality is out of frustration, not because of who he is.
I’ve been re-watching a lot of ENT recently and I have to say, Archer is growing on me. He’s not the cowboy that Kirk was, the diplomatic explorer that Picard was, the conflicted patriot that Sisko was, or the feisty den mother that Janeway was. He was the best humanity had and he still ended up having to learn a lot on the job. He was a skilled pilot and leader but quickly found out that deep space exploration has a whole separate set of challenges that humanity didn’t realize existed.
Part of the charm of Archer is watching him develop as a captain, from someone who is unsure about the right way to do things and struggles with the desire to prove to himself (and the Vulcans) that it really is time for humanity to leave the cradle to someone who got accustomed to making incredibly hard decisions for the greater good.
I think the problem with Enterprise was two-fold: Scott Bakula wasn’t the right choice for Archer (as much as we may love him from Quantum Leap and Chuck), and there was a much greater focus on the three major characters than any show since TOS. They criminally underused the supporting cast (except maybe Phlox) and left them (especially Travis and Hoshi) as underdeveloped appendages to whatever else was going on.
DB goes by what they think sells. Enterprise is the least liked trek series. It nearly killed the franchise. It had some good points but it also had a lot of bad ones. The end was so terrible. That being said, DB should have an Archer in an event or say why he hasnt been in an event as he was a captain. You cant say that DB has ignored other aspects of Enterprise as we have had two events with degra, we just got a couple shrans, and we have had other ent peeps. Remember that Enterprise only went for four seasons and was cancelled. People might say Discovery has too many characters and that a lot of people complain about Discovery, but it is the only running trek series and so must be well represented in order to bring in new people.
You might be right. (Though I personally like Enterprise.)
But DB does not hate Enterprise. The show itself is well represented. Or it seems so; I haven't seen a representational percentage breakdown of the various shows.
The question at hand is why DB hates Jonathan Archer. All the bickering over which show is best does not answer the question.
Even if he were the least liked captain, (though, again, I personally like him,) there is no reason for the animosity DM shows him. It is not simply having fewer cards. It is blatantly leaving him out of story lines that he should be in.
Is there any other character in Star Trek that DB so obviously shuns?
If the next mega-event will be about Romulans I would like to have Johnatan Archer as a Mega-Event character because he was crucial in the Earth-Romulan war.
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?
How very Un Roddenberry. You almost exposed your racism... phew. Thank goodness No one noticed.
You are really against blue people. Blue women specifically. Interesting isn't it
that's not true... without any research I know that's false.
Aside from the animated series and the new show...
It could be enterprise because no one could tell if it was canon or not while it was on the air and it had a terrible finale...
Which is probably the explanation as to why Archer doesn't get a big event
nothing to do with the character it'self
DB has shown it's quite happy to release multiple versions of notoriously unpopular characters - 2 in the same week, as a matter of fact - so the whole popularity argument is rather moot.
It is weird that Archer is consistently absent from storylines where his presence would be almost a foregone conclusion, and that he's demonized in one entire Episode (though technically that's the entire crew of the NX-01 being tarred), and then specifically chopped out of his most significant historical role altogether in one of the events.
Going by Erin's old explanation of how the stories are written for events (after the manner of Mad Libs, with all of the blanks being character names, because they have to write in advance of knowing for whom they will actually get approval), there will almost invariably be some odd juxtapositions between what the ostensible story is and which crew are made a part of it. I think we all understand there's an element of things being out of DB's hands (e.g., Charlie Evans, Amanda Grayson, TOS Harry Mudd, Surak, why there are still very few voice clips in the game)... and if one of those situations is what's creating the lack of Archers, then they ought to tell us that instead of leaving players to spin their wheels.
I don’t think DB hates archer, they just understand that enterprise was not a very good series. Which was largely do to the writers of the show. I think Scott Bakula made a decent captain. Much better than Sisko IMHO. However, DS9 was still better despite him.
So, I might have a minority opinion here, but I really dislike the mirror universe, especially in ds9. It is a great place to see dystopia, but way too many episodes focus on it.
I liked it in TOS and ENT, but I agree it got to be a little much in DS9. I view those episodes as more "entertaining fluff" than anything else. There were some parts I liked, but Mirror Kira always made me cringe.
Mirror Kira was a ridiculous character - totally unwatchable for me. But I'm not a mirror fan anyway - I completely agree it's relentlessly dystopian and without nuance. Currently, I think DSC is the worst Trek series by quite some way. But as others have said, I'm prepared to give it more time. For me it's biggest problem is it does not feel like an ensemble show as all the others were - it's "The adventures of Michael Burnham" and with all respect to Sonequa MG - she can't carry the whole thing. The series concentrated too much on the overall arc and neglected stand alone episodes, which give the audience a break and maybe occasionally light relief.
I'm in the middle of an Enterprise re-watch at the moment and think that it is a top notch Trek show. If I had to rate Trek in order of preferrence it would go:
Voy
ENT
TNG
DS9
TOS
TAS
DSC
“Holodeck 2 tomorrow, 1600 hours. Just you, me and a tuning fork”
I don’t think DB hates archer, they just understand that enterprise was not a very good series. Which was largely do to the writers of the show. I think Scott Bakula made a decent captain. Much better than Sisko IMHO. However, DS9 was still better despite him.
I’ve also been rewatching ENT and find that it’s a lot better than I originally thought. I commented elsewhere in the last few days that one of the problems was poor supporting cast development: outside of a few token episodes, Hoshi, Travis, and Malcolm all feel underdeveloped. The writers focused a little too much on Archer, T’Pol, and Tucker (with some less frequent love for Phlox) and the show suffered for it.
I’ll use a fun exercise to help solidify my point. What are the three primary characters from each series?
Now, arguments could be made that DS9, Voyager, and TNG were able to flesh out more characters because they ran longer and that they did more heavily feature certain characters over others, but they did partially ignore some important characters (Chakotay especially), although not to the extent of Enterprise. I give TOS a pass in part due to the nostalgia factor and in part to how very well those three characters worked together.
Comments
Same goes for you. If you want all out war with no rules don't be upset if you actually get it. Things like false accusations will fall under your "free speech" philosophy, and people airing silly opinions like "the victim must be trusted and the accused must be punished" without any rules attached (like due procedure and evidence) will be a consequence of no rules.
Like it or not, polite and respectful debate are the signs of civilized behaviour.
Check out our website to find out more:
https://wiki.tenforwardloungers.com/
Voyager is the least liked trek series.
Actually in the "Which Series Do You Like Best" Polls that I've seen both here and other places, Voyager usually outpaces Enterprise by a factor of 2 to 1
For instance in the latest one here in the forums, the series were ranked as follows:
DS9 - 38%
TNG - 25%
TOS - 15%
Voy - 12%
ENT - 3%
DSC - 2%
TAS - 1%
There are many such polls out there in internetland and in very few does this order change much.
https://forum.disruptorbeam.com/stt/discussion/40/which-star-trek-tv-series-is-your-favourite/p1
Then you have a several youtube channel that says the same Anti-Trekker, Lore Reloaded etc.
Check out our website to find out more:
https://wiki.tenforwardloungers.com/
A whole hell of a lot better than Discovery. Also, Enterprise is Star Trek, Discovery is more like a semi-high quality fan film; a sci-fi show with occasional Star Trek affectations.
Thx you gave me a hard laugh. „....semi high quality fan film“.
Its obvious you never watched Discovery at all.
Regarding the topic:
I don t mind a new Archer, as 2* threshold reward.
Glad I could help. I’ve watched all of Enterprise and I’ve watched the entire first season of Discovery as well. I stand by my earlier statement. Please don’t misunderstand; I don’t hate Disco, I just don’t think it’s good enough, yet, to be called Star Trek. Close, especially near the end, but not yet, but then again, TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise all had rough first seasons. As usual, hindsight will be 20/20.
Task Force Pike/Garrett's Giants, Founder
Task Force April, Fleet Founder Emeritus
Newfie Central, Squad Founder, In Memoriam
I liked it in TOS and ENT, but I agree it got to be a little much in DS9. I view those episodes as more "entertaining fluff" than anything else. There were some parts I liked, but Mirror Kira always made me cringe.
Cardassian wishlist:
Tora Ziyal - Thanks!
Natima Lang
Empok Nor Garak
Tekeny Ghemor
Mira
Makbar
Dejar
Ulani Belor
That's less than 3% of all DS9 eps.
Well, compared to 1 TOS and 2 ENT.
It's not so much the number of episodes though, as it is just that it felt as though they weren't really doing anything new or interesting in the Mirror Universe. I liked some parts (mainly Sisko and Smiley), but by the end it was just too much and unnecessary. I would have rathered another Ferengi episode or something.
Cardassian wishlist:
Tora Ziyal - Thanks!
Natima Lang
Empok Nor Garak
Tekeny Ghemor
Mira
Makbar
Dejar
Ulani Belor
Or 7 Discovery.
I get not liking them, it just really wasn't that much and could be easily skipped over.
I thought they showed progression in the eps, with the Jennifer arc, and with the whole resistance thing. The last ep, frankly wasn't so much a mirror ep as it was lets try to use the Mirror U as comic relief for the Ferengi, with the bright spot being Ezri.
Rom kinda blew the last ep for me as it was like watching Goofy in a Disney cartoon.
"Skippable" certainly is the word.
I will grant that they had a continuing plot, which helped. And it's possibly the last ep that sort of retroactively ruined it for me. It felt like they just ran out of ideas and were using the MU as a crutch.
The arc with Mirror Jennifer and Jake were pretty good, but ultimately felt "meh" by the end.
Disco Mirror stuff though was entirely unnecessary, ruined the character of Lorca and felt like a giant waste of time.
Cardassian wishlist:
Tora Ziyal - Thanks!
Natima Lang
Empok Nor Garak
Tekeny Ghemor
Mira
Makbar
Dejar
Ulani Belor
It reeks of the lazy trope in dungeons and dragons of “my pc has an identical twin to replace them when they die”.
Task Force Pike/Garrett's Giants, Founder
Task Force April, Fleet Founder Emeritus
Newfie Central, Squad Founder, In Memoriam
It works better if your father/mother was a mad scientist/wizard who cloned you a bunch at birth.
But your DM might still have laughed you out of the basement though.
Cardassian wishlist:
Tora Ziyal - Thanks!
Natima Lang
Empok Nor Garak
Tekeny Ghemor
Mira
Makbar
Dejar
Ulani Belor
Thats actually not what happened. He is not fused with the spores he is fused with the Tardigrade DNA.
@the OP There are 6 Archers in the game. Thats plenty. Is the argument that we don’t have high enough stats? The game good use a "Captain Archer" and problem should have had one by now over some of the other variations.
Really? There’s been a player like that in half the role playing groups I’ve been in.
Task Force Pike/Garrett's Giants, Founder
Task Force April, Fleet Founder Emeritus
Newfie Central, Squad Founder, In Memoriam
Also, comparatively the number of Mirror episodes in DS9 were really small, and I rather liked them, though I kinda ended up hating the Intendant. She was awesome in the very first appearance but steadily became more and more cartoonish in her villainy. It was still fun to watch but actually ends up making me think of Doctor Chaotica, lol, in its hamishness (I’m not sure that’s a word but I’m using it as one.).
yep DS9 might even be my favourite series prior to DSC, and agree the characters are relatively good. And i'm not saying there is nothing complex about these characters and your examples of spock and picard are decent ones (i was also thinking about data when referring to the logical one) and I acknowledge they are not completely one dimensional. But even so i get the impression that the concepts were ones of "heres the bridge crew and their core traits" and writing is one of, like, "what would happen if the logical one fell in love" etc, etc.
I'm not saying other series are terrible (i wouldn't be a fan if it was), just saying I believe (and I know not everyone will agree with me) that Discovery does this better than any of the predecessors. Mainly i was taking aim at ENT. I'm glad you mentioned DS9 and Picard, as Sisko, Picard (and Janeway to some extent) do have their layers and intriguing elements, but i never got that with Archer.
And i think you misunderstand what i'm saying about stamets - its not so much what happens to him that changes him, its that you understand him more too. Theres one scene (before the event you refer to) where burnham is helping him, and he cuts this sideways glance which is perfect, where you understand that he's not what you first expect. His curmudgeonly personality is out of frustration, not because of who he is.
Part of the charm of Archer is watching him develop as a captain, from someone who is unsure about the right way to do things and struggles with the desire to prove to himself (and the Vulcans) that it really is time for humanity to leave the cradle to someone who got accustomed to making incredibly hard decisions for the greater good.
I think the problem with Enterprise was two-fold: Scott Bakula wasn’t the right choice for Archer (as much as we may love him from Quantum Leap and Chuck), and there was a much greater focus on the three major characters than any show since TOS. They criminally underused the supporting cast (except maybe Phlox) and left them (especially Travis and Hoshi) as underdeveloped appendages to whatever else was going on.
You might be right. (Though I personally like Enterprise.)
But DB does not hate Enterprise. The show itself is well represented. Or it seems so; I haven't seen a representational percentage breakdown of the various shows.
The question at hand is why DB hates Jonathan Archer. All the bickering over which show is best does not answer the question.
Even if he were the least liked captain, (though, again, I personally like him,) there is no reason for the animosity DM shows him. It is not simply having fewer cards. It is blatantly leaving him out of story lines that he should be in.
Is there any other character in Star Trek that DB so obviously shuns?
How very Un Roddenberry. You almost exposed your racism... phew. Thank goodness No one noticed.
You are really against blue people. Blue women specifically. Interesting isn't it
that's not true... without any research I know that's false.
Aside from the animated series and the new show...
It could be enterprise because no one could tell if it was canon or not while it was on the air and it had a terrible finale...
Which is probably the explanation as to why Archer doesn't get a big event
nothing to do with the character it'self
It is weird that Archer is consistently absent from storylines where his presence would be almost a foregone conclusion, and that he's demonized in one entire Episode (though technically that's the entire crew of the NX-01 being tarred), and then specifically chopped out of his most significant historical role altogether in one of the events.
Going by Erin's old explanation of how the stories are written for events (after the manner of Mad Libs, with all of the blanks being character names, because they have to write in advance of knowing for whom they will actually get approval), there will almost invariably be some odd juxtapositions between what the ostensible story is and which crew are made a part of it. I think we all understand there's an element of things being out of DB's hands (e.g., Charlie Evans, Amanda Grayson, TOS Harry Mudd, Surak, why there are still very few voice clips in the game)... and if one of those situations is what's creating the lack of Archers, then they ought to tell us that instead of leaving players to spin their wheels.
Mirror Kira was a ridiculous character - totally unwatchable for me. But I'm not a mirror fan anyway - I completely agree it's relentlessly dystopian and without nuance. Currently, I think DSC is the worst Trek series by quite some way. But as others have said, I'm prepared to give it more time. For me it's biggest problem is it does not feel like an ensemble show as all the others were - it's "The adventures of Michael Burnham" and with all respect to Sonequa MG - she can't carry the whole thing. The series concentrated too much on the overall arc and neglected stand alone episodes, which give the audience a break and maybe occasionally light relief.
I'm in the middle of an Enterprise re-watch at the moment and think that it is a top notch Trek show. If I had to rate Trek in order of preferrence it would go:
Voy
ENT
TNG
DS9
TOS
TAS
DSC
I’ve also been rewatching ENT and find that it’s a lot better than I originally thought. I commented elsewhere in the last few days that one of the problems was poor supporting cast development: outside of a few token episodes, Hoshi, Travis, and Malcolm all feel underdeveloped. The writers focused a little too much on Archer, T’Pol, and Tucker (with some less frequent love for Phlox) and the show suffered for it.
I’ll use a fun exercise to help solidify my point. What are the three primary characters from each series?
ENT: Archer, T’Pol, Tucker
TOS/TAS: Kirk, Spock, McCoy
DS9: Sisko, Dax, Worf, Odo, Bashir, O’Brien (oops, six)
VOY: Janeway, Seven, The Doctor, Tuvok, B’Elanna, Tom, Harry (oops, seven)
TNG: Picard, Data, Worf, Riker, Dr. Crusher, Geordi, Troi (oops, seven again)
DSC: Burnham (oops, one)
Now, arguments could be made that DS9, Voyager, and TNG were able to flesh out more characters because they ran longer and that they did more heavily feature certain characters over others, but they did partially ignore some important characters (Chakotay especially), although not to the extent of Enterprise. I give TOS a pass in part due to the nostalgia factor and in part to how very well those three characters worked together.