Quote from: First Blood on Dec 16, 2012, 12:46:34 AM
I don't know much about Trek tv but how does Enterprise hold up as a prequel to the Original Series?
I recently watched both, starting with
Enterprise, since that's a prequel and all.
Enterprise has some good characters, a few of which actually develop over the show's four seasons. As a prequel to TOS and the other shows, it does start laying the groundwork for stuff that turns up in TOS and the later shows, but much of the true prequel stuff shows up in the fourth season, even going so far as to have a two-parter explaining why Klingons in TOS lacked forehead ridges. The first two seasons of
Enterprise are a bit inconsistent in terms of quality, and the show at this point lacks direction as they're meandering about in space and going through some rather ordinary plots where Archer and crew screw around with alien civilizations, as the Prime Directive doesn't exist at that point.
The third and fourth seasons are vast improvements, with the third actually giving the show much-needed focus and taking it into a grittier direction. The fourth builds on this and starts laying the groundwork for stuff that turns up in TOS, such as the Romulan War that was mentioned in TOS as occurring one hundred years prior (at the time of
Enterprise), and in the fourth season of ENT there's a three-parter about a Romulan scheme to destabilize relations between different races, which acts as a sort of build-up to this war (however, the show was cancelled before this war could be portrayed in a firth, and perhaps sixth, season).
Some fans complain that ENT contradicts stuff in later shows, but Star Trek has always been inconsistent in terms of dealing with its canon. The amount of contradictions that show up in TOS concerning the date when it's set come to mind immediately. So, for me, a few apparent canon disruptions don't bother me.
