Sign in to follow this  
Justin Snead

Tomorrowland and why Phlox typified Enterprise's creative failure

Recommended Posts

Archer was written with some Bush-inspired qualities (particularly season 3), but the dumb look I always chucked up to Bakula being utterly baffled by the weak scripts he was being forced to work on. I don't think Archer was a great character, but I must admit I love Bakula. Quantum Leap is fantastic (I have an affinity for shows about time travelers who burst into light and look like somebody else).

And that was one of the reasons I was so excited when Bakula was announced as Capt. Archer; I was already a huge "Quantum Leap" fan (or "Leapers" as we call ourselves... heehee). But what I didn't like were his constant anger issues with T'Pol and his overall belligerent, intolerant, confrontational attitude towards aliens; it seemed he was (too often) applying Federation values to alien cultures. His hostility towards Vulcans was a mistake right out of the box as far as I'm concerned (and it has nothing to do with Vulcans being my favorites of course.... :angel_not: ).

And as GD pointed out above, more often than not he was just proving the Vulcans right...

But by S4, the show took a sharp left turn and became something unexpectedly special. There were a few good episodes here and there in the first three years, but S4 was largely terrific the whole year. Only a couple duds in the bunch. I sincerely wish that S4 had been S1, but oh well.... if wishes were horses, right?

2aaa61aac9f76cfdf5bcdb3ccf3a7238.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sim   

I didn't flat-out dislike Archer, as I suspected he was deliberately portrayed as cocky and inexperienced in the beginning, just to let him learn over the course of the series, for that he'd become more mature and level-headed.

But his belligerence and vengefulness in season 3 was very hard to swallow for me. However, he did develop at the beginning of season 4. Unfortunately, he didn't get the chance to go even further down that route, due to ENT's premature cancellation.

I've never been a die-hard Quantum Leap fan, but I had seen a couple of episodes here and there, so I was thrilled when they announced Bakula would be the new Captain. And I do like the actor. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't flat-out dislike Archer, as I suspected he was deliberately portrayed as cocky and inexperienced in the beginning, just to let him learn over the course of the series, for that he'd become more mature and level-headed.

But his belligerence and vengefulness in season 3 was very hard to swallow for me. However, he did develop at the beginning of season 4. Unfortunately, he didn't get the chance to go even further down that route, due to ENT's premature cancellation.

I've never been a die-hard Quantum Leap fan, but I had seen a couple of episodes here and there, so I was thrilled when they announced Bakula would be the new Captain. And I do like the actor. :)

After seeing Bakula on Looking for HBO, and pretty much everything he has done for HBO, I really respect him. It is embarrassing to Star Trek that he was so badly wasted.

I am curious why people feel like Berman And Braga intended for there to be a big character arc for him, as you suggest in your post, where he learns wisdom due to his experience. To me he was alway written has already possessing that wisdom, despite a few lines here and there about having so much to learn. To those who have seen every episode, which is more likely?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sim   

I didn't flat-out dislike Archer, as I suspected he was deliberately portrayed as cocky and inexperienced in the beginning, just to let him learn over the course of the series, for that he'd become more mature and level-headed.

But his belligerence and vengefulness in season 3 was very hard to swallow for me. However, he did develop at the beginning of season 4. Unfortunately, he didn't get the chance to go even further down that route, due to ENT's premature cancellation.

I've never been a die-hard Quantum Leap fan, but I had seen a couple of episodes here and there, so I was thrilled when they announced Bakula would be the new Captain. And I do like the actor. :)

After seeing Bakula on Looking for HBO, and pretty much everything he has done for HBO, I really respect him. It is embarrassing to Star Trek that he was so badly wasted.

I am curious why people feel like Berman And Braga intended for there to be a big character arc for him, as you suggest in your post, where he learns wisdom due to his experience. To me he was alway written has already possessing that wisdom, despite a few lines here and there about having so much to learn. To those who have seen every episode, which is more likely?

Well, as was pointed out by other posters above already, he was indeed wrong *many* times, and he even got one line that explicitly hinted at the Prime Directive to be established later just because he made so many mistakes (Founder quoted it).

So it is obvious that he was deliberately written this way. This is no interpretation, it's right there on screen.

Edited by Sim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't flat-out dislike Archer, as I suspected he was deliberately portrayed as cocky and inexperienced in the beginning, just to let him learn over the course of the series, for that he'd become more mature and level-headed.

But his belligerence and vengefulness in season 3 was very hard to swallow for me. However, he did develop at the beginning of season 4. Unfortunately, he didn't get the chance to go even further down that route, due to ENT's premature cancellation.

I've never been a die-hard Quantum Leap fan, but I had seen a couple of episodes here and there, so I was thrilled when they announced Bakula would be the new Captain. And I do like the actor. :)

After seeing Bakula on Looking for HBO, and pretty much everything he has done for HBO, I really respect him. It is embarrassing to Star Trek that he was so badly wasted.

I am curious why people feel like Berman And Braga intended for there to be a big character arc for him, as you suggest in your post, where he learns wisdom due to his experience. To me he was alway written has already possessing that wisdom, despite a few lines here and there about having so much to learn. To those who have seen every episode, which is more likely?

Well, as was pointed out by other posters above already, he was indeed wrong *many* times, and he even got one line that explicitly hinted at the Prime Directive to be established later just because he made so many mistakes (Founder quoted it).

So it is obvious that he was deliberately written this way. This is no interpretation, it's right there on screen.

Can you give an example of when Archer made the wrong call. I know he did, but I can't think of them.

The Prime Directive quote. I assume that in that episode he made a decision that would have gone against the as yet unwritten Prime Directive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't flat-out dislike Archer, as I suspected he was deliberately portrayed as cocky and inexperienced in the beginning, just to let him learn over the course of the series, for that he'd become more mature and level-headed.

But his belligerence and vengefulness in season 3 was very hard to swallow for me. However, he did develop at the beginning of season 4. Unfortunately, he didn't get the chance to go even further down that route, due to ENT's premature cancellation.

I've never been a die-hard Quantum Leap fan, but I had seen a couple of episodes here and there, so I was thrilled when they announced Bakula would be the new Captain. And I do like the actor. :)

After seeing Bakula on Looking for HBO, and pretty much everything he has done for HBO, I really respect him. It is embarrassing to Star Trek that he was so badly wasted.

I am curious why people feel like Berman And Braga intended for there to be a big character arc for him, as you suggest in your post, where he learns wisdom due to his experience. To me he was alway written has already possessing that wisdom, despite a few lines here and there about having so much to learn. To those who have seen every episode, which is more likely?

Well, as was pointed out by other posters above already, he was indeed wrong *many* times, and he even got one line that explicitly hinted at the Prime Directive to be established later just because he made so many mistakes (Founder quoted it).

So it is obvious that he was deliberately written this way. This is no interpretation, it's right there on screen.

Can you give an example of when Archer made the wrong call. I know he did, but I can't think of them.

The Prime Directive quote. I assume that in that episode he made a decision that would have gone against the as yet unwritten Prime Directive?

"The Communicator"; he and Reed basically got accused of being alien spies because Reed left his communicator behind. The planet was a warlike, volatile world; there was truly NO reason for them to be there at all.

"Strange New World"; Archer ignores T'Pol's advice to do a 7 day long survey of the new planet from orbit first (which would've easily detected the psychotropic compounds in the atmosphere that drove the crew crazy, and resulted in an hysterical crewman almost getting killed during an emergency beam out).

"Breaking the Ice"; Archer decides to land a shuttle on a giant comet (against Vulcan advice) and later needs the Vulcans to tow it out (Mayweather even exhibits a bit of racism by making a Vulcan-faced snowman on the comet... seemed a bit rude, especially since they save his ass later on). Archer is forced to swallow his pride and offer thanks.

"Fusion"; Archer makes T'Pol work with emotional Vulcans she is clearly uncomfortable around; in fact, she deliberately avoids them. But because Archer thinks it's cool that they eat chicken, he tells her to work aboard their ship (against her intuition). Leads to T'Pol getting mind-raped by one of them, and landing in a coma. Probably Archer's worst call yet, IMO.

There are others, but those are just from S1...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
scenario   

One of the early episodes had Hoshi try to take care of an alien plant. When it started dying they planted it on the next suitable planet. Transplanting a living species to a planet where it has no predators is irresponsible. If it lived it could seriously damage the ecosystem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the early episodes had Hoshi try to take care of an alien plant. When it started dying they planted it on the next suitable planet. Transplanting a living species to a planet where it has no predators is irresponsible. If it lived it could seriously damage the ecosystem.

As I recall, it was a slug. "Sluggo" they called it. Very irresponsible to just pluck it from its native habitat like that in the first place, without knowing ANYTHING about its nutritional needs or its role in its native ecology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammer   

One of the early episodes had Hoshi try to take care of an alien plant. When it started dying they planted it on the next suitable planet. Transplanting a living species to a planet where it has no predators is irresponsible. If it lived it could seriously damage the ecosystem.

As I recall, it was a slug. "Sluggo" they called it. Very irresponsible to just pluck it from its native habitat like that in the first place, without knowing ANYTHING about its nutritional needs or its role in its native ecology.

I think these mistakes were just used as new story angles by the writers. It gave them something to do that you would never see them do on later series because of that pesky prime directive. I certainly believe that these mistakes shouldn't happen, like revealing yourself as an alien to a pre-warp culture for example, but the writers got to do something that would otherwise break the rules. The problem was there weren't any re-visits, (if I missed any, let me know) how did their prime directive 'violations' (even though it doesn't exist yet) affect the planets they visited long-term?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
scenario   

One of the early episodes had Hoshi try to take care of an alien plant. When it started dying they planted it on the next suitable planet. Transplanting a living species to a planet where it has no predators is irresponsible. If it lived it could seriously damage the ecosystem.

As I recall, it was a slug. "Sluggo" they called it. Very irresponsible to just pluck it from its native habitat like that in the first place, without knowing ANYTHING about its nutritional needs or its role in its native ecology.

I think these mistakes were just used as new story angles by the writers. It gave them something to do that you would never see them do on later series because of that pesky prime directive. I certainly believe that these mistakes shouldn't happen, like revealing yourself as an alien to a pre-warp culture for example, but the writers got to do something that would otherwise break the rules. The problem was there weren't any re-visits, (if I missed any, let me know) how did their prime directive 'violations' (even though it doesn't exist yet) affect the planets they visited long-term?

There are some mistakes that make sense and some don't. Transplanting an organism to a new environment proved disastrous on earth. It's common sense to any scientist not to do it. I can see them thinking if they just visited a prewarp planet and limited their exposure, nothing bad would happen. Early contacts between western cultures and less technologically advanced cultures weren't always bad.

I think that they would have revisited planets in season 5.

Edited by scenario

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this