www.ditl.org

I'd hardly call it a "musical episode" just because it had a song in it.

GrahamKennedy wrote:I'd hardly call it a "musical episode" just because it had a song in it.

Still it was far more than Trek ever did, it was also one of the hardest hitting episodes in the show.

Agreed with all and sundry - no BoT would have relieved one particular symptom, but the disease still would've been rampant.

Cpl Kendall wrote:

GrahamKennedy wrote:I'd hardly call it a "musical episode" just because it had a song in it.

Still it was far more than Trek ever did, it was also one of the hardest hitting episodes in the show.

Hey, Picard sang Heart of Oak in one episode! And in Insurrection he and Worf performed A British Tar!

GrahamKennedy wrote:

Cpl Kendall wrote:

GrahamKennedy wrote:I'd hardly call it a "musical episode" just because it had a song in it.

Still it was far more than Trek ever did, it was also one of the hardest hitting episodes in the show.

Hey, Picard sang Heart of Oak in one episode! And in Insurrection he and Worf performed A British Tar!

"Mr Worf, do you know Gilbert and Sullivan?

No, Sir, I have not had a chance to meet all the new crew members since I have been back."

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=61AAwNDwU4U

Don't forget O'Brien and Maxwell

Or O'Brien and Bashir

Everyone has a different reason. I could have ignored the canon violations and lame retro designs if the stories had been good. But how long do they expect me to watch recycled scripts and stuff that belongs in a sit-com?

For me it began with the Cannon violations. I can understand if someone makes a mistake. Hell, WE try and explain those away for them. It was the blatent disregard they showed for what came before. Following that, it was the weak writing and recycled scripts. We never got to see ANYTHING that I was hoping we'd see. In all of the other series, I could think of the episodes I didn't like. In Enterprise, I have to look for the few episodes that I DID like.

I'm not positive, but I htink one or two people have expressed similar sentiments for ENT.

Hmmm.........we should get together then, and discuss that then.

If you can remember who they were, of course.

Why did they omit the 'star trek', and make it just 'enterprise' ?

Because if they named it "Star Trek" then there'd be a great disturbance in the fabric of reality, resulting in the ghost of Gene Roddenberry coming back from the dead to bitchslap some sense into them. They didn't think the risk was worth it.

Granitehewer wrote:Why did they omit the 'star trek', and make it just 'enterprise' ?

In the first few seasons it was just "Enterprise", but then part of the way through, they changed it to "Star Trek: Enterprise". Before the change, we could cling to the fanciful idea that it wasn't really supposed to be Star Trek at all.

Rochey wrote:Because if they named it "Star Trek" then there'd be a great disturbance in the fabric of reality, resulting in the ghost of Gene Roddenberry coming back from the dead to bitchslap some sense into them. They didn't think the risk was worth it.

Then, of course, Roddenberry's ghost would demand a casting call with Jolene Blalock...

Well, he's not coming all the way back from the dead without some incentive, is he?

IIRC, I read somewhere that it was called Enterprise because they DIDN'T want to use Star Trek, and thus have many pre-concieved expectations. And what says Star Trek without saying Star Trek? Enterprise.